A HISTORY OF SANSKRIT LITERATURE CLASSICAL PERIOD -6

A HISTORY OF SANSKRIT LITERATURE

CLASSICAL PERIOD

VOL. I

General Editor and

Contributors to this Volume:

S. N. DASGUPTA

and

S. K. DE,

The literary evidence furnished by the quotations and

references in Patanjali's Mahabhasya, which show that the

Sanskrit Kavya in some of its recognised forms flourished in the

2nd century B.C.,

gives us the first definite indication regarding

its early origin and development. Patafijali directly

mentions a "Vararuca Kavya (ad h.3.101),

although, un-

1 R. G. Bhandarkar in JBRAS, XVI, p. 344.

  These archaisms are authenticated by the Epics, by As*vaghosa and by what Pataft;ali

Bays about poetic licence. Narni-sidhu, as noted above, rightly points out that such irregular

forms are not rare even in later poets, The frdgtn2nts quoted by ilayamukut i and Narnisld

m have undoubtedly the appearance of bsing old. Some of the Anthology verses contain

instances of 1e:lio difficilior, which have been discussad by B5'itlingk in ZDMG, XXXVT, p

659.

3   introd. to

56Jit? p. 103; Skm, introd., pp. 105-07), we hive similar verses ascribe J to Bhartrbari (see

Peterson in Sbhv, introd., p. 74; Skm, iutrod., p. 82) and Vya^i (Skm, V. 82.2;.

  On the question of Patafifali's date, which is still uncertain, see Keith, India Office Cat.

o/ MSSt II, p. 2l8f.

& One o! Rajas*ekhara

f

8 verses in the Sukti mukiGvaH tells us that the name of Vararuci 's

poem was Kan(babharana. Vararuci is one of the mysterious figures of early Sanskrit

literature. He is sometimes identified with the V&rttikakara Katyayana and extolled as one

of the nine gems of the court of on equally mysterious Vikramadilya. To him a monologueOtWGINS

AND CHARACTERISTICS 11

fortunately, he supplies no further information about it. He

refers to poetic licence, which was apparently not rare in his day,

with the remark : chandovnt kavayah kurvanti (ad i.4.3). He

appears to know various forms of the Kavya literature other than

poetry, although from his tantalisingly brief references or fragmentary

quotations it is not always possible to determine in what

exact form they were known to him. Like Panini, Patanjali

knows the Bharata epic and refers to Granthikas, who were

probably professional reciters. Tales about Yavakrita, Priyarigu

and Yayati were current; and commenting on Katyayana's

oldest mention of the Akhyayika,

1 which alluded not to narrative

episodes found in the Epics but to independent works, Patanjali

gives the names of three Akhyayikas, namely, Vasavadatta,

Bumanottara and Bhaimarathl. But, unfortunately, we have no

details regarding their form and content. In an obscure passage

(ad iii. 1.2G), over the interpretation of which there has been

much difference of opinion,

2 a reference is made to some kind of

entertainment possibly dramatic in which a class of entertainers

called Saubhikas carry out, apparently by means of vivid

action, the killing of Kamsa and the binding of Bali. Greater

interest attaches to some forty quotations, mostly metrical, but

often given in fragments, in which one can find eulogistic, erotic

or gnomic themes in the approved style and language of the

Kavya. The metres in which they are conveyed are no longer

play, entitled Ubhayabhisarika, is attributed, as well a3 a lost work called Carumati, which was

apparently a romauce. He is vaguely referred to as an authority on the Aiamkara-s'a'atra (S. If.

De, Sanskrit Poetics, I, p. 70) and regarded as the author of a Prakrit Grammar (Prakftaprakata),

of a work on grammatical gender (Lihgdnua$ana) t of a collection of gnomic stanzas

(Niti-ratna) and even of an eastern version of the collection of folk-tales known as Sinihasana*

dvdtrirtisikd. Apparently, be was me of the far-off apocryphal authors of traditional repute on

whom all anooyma could be conveniently lumped.

1 Varttika on Pa,, iv.3.87 and iv.2.60. Also see Patafi;ali, ed. Kielhorn, II, p. 284.

Katyayana knows a work named Daiv&suram, dealing apparently with the story of the war of

gods and demons.

2 Ed. Kielhorn, II, p. 36. See Weber in Ind> St., XIII, p. 488f ; Liiders in SBAW, 1916,

p. C98f ; L6vi ia ThMtre tnd.,I, p. 315; Hillebrandb in ZDMG, LXXU, p. 227f; Keith io

BSOS, I, Pt. 4, p. 27f and Sanskrit Drama, Oxford, 1924, p. fclf.

Vedic, but we have, besides the classical Sloka, fragments of

stanzas in Malati, Praharsim, VamSasthavila, Vasantatilaka,

Pramitaksara, Tndravajra or Upendravajra. In addition to this,

there are about 260 scattered verses *

treating of grammatical

matters (sometimes called Sloka-varttikas), which employ, besides

the normal gloka, Arya, Vaktra and some irregular Tristubh-

Jagatl metres, such ornate lyrical measures as Vidyunmala

(3 stanzas), Samani, Indravajra and Upendravajra (7 stanzas),

SalinI (4 stanzas), Vamsasthavila, Dodhaka (12 stanzas) and

Totaka (2 stanzas).

This early evolution of lyrical measures, multitude of which

is systematically defined and classified in the earliest known

work on Prosody, attributed to Pingala,

2 takes us beyond the

sphere of the Vedic and Epic metrical systems. The Epic poets,

generally less sensitive to delicate rhythmic effects, preferred

metres in which long series of stanzas could be composed with

ease ; but the metrical variation in lyric and sentimental poetry,

which had love for its principal theme, accounts for the large

number of lyric metres which came into existence in the

classical period. Some of the new metres derive their names

from their characteristic form or movement : such as, Drutavilambita

'

fast and slow,' VegavatI

'

of impetuous motion/

Mandakranta '

stepping slowly,' Tvaritagati

'

quickly moving

'

;

some are named after plants and flowers: Mala 'garland/

Mafijari

' blossom '

; some are called after the sound and

habit of animals, Sardula-vikrldita '

play of the tiger/ Avalalita

'

gait of the horse/ Harini-pluta

'

leap of the deer/

Hamsa-ruta '

cackling of the geese/ Bhramara-vilasita '

sportiveness

of the bees,' Gaja-gati

* motion of elephant

'

; but it

is also remarkable that the names given to a very large number

1 Kielhorn in lA t XV, 1886, p. 228 ; also 1A t XIV, pp. 326-27.

8 M. Ghosh in IHQ, VII, 1931, p. 724f, maintains that the parts dealing with the

.Vcdic and classical metres respectively cannot be attributed to the same auth<r, &nd that

the Vedio part should be assigned to circa 600 B.C.; D, C Sarcar, in Ind. Culture, VI,

pp. 110f,274, believes that the classical part cannot be placed earlier than the 5th century A.D.

OB1GINS AN ft CHARACTERISTICS 13

of metres are epithets of fair maidens : Tanvi '

slender-limbed/

Kucira '

dainty/ Pramada ' handsome/ Pramitaksara ' a

maiden of measured words/ Manjubhasini

'

a maiden of charming

speech/ SaSivadana '

moonfaced/ Citralekha * a maiden of

beautiful outlines/ Vidyunmrila

* chain of lightning/ Kanakaprabha

' radiance of gold/ Cfiruhasin! '

sweetly smiling/ Kundadanti

' a maiden of budlike teeth/ Vasantatilaka '

decoration

of spring/ Cancalaksi ' a maiden of tremulous glances/

Sragdhara 'a maiden with a garland/ and Kantotpkla

'

plague

of her lovers

'

! The names mentioned above undoubtedly

indicate a more developed and delicate sense of rhythmic forms.

The names of fair maidens, however, need not be taken as

having actually occurred in poems originally composed in their

honour by diverse poets, but they certainly point to an original

connexion of these Jyric metres with erotic themes ; and Jacobi

is right in suggesting

] that they had their origin in the Sanskrit

Kavya poetry of a pre-Christian era, from which the Maharastri

lyric also had its impetus and inspiration.

The difficulty of arriving at an exact conclusion regarding

the origin and development of the Kavya arises from the fact

that all the Kavya literature between Patanjali and Asvaghosa

has now disappeared ; and we cannot confidently assign any

of the Kavyas, which have come down to us, to the period

between the 2nd century B.C. and the 1st or 2nd century A.D.

We have thus absolutely no knowledge of the formative period

of Sanskrit literature. The Kavya does not indeed emerge in

a definite and self-conscious form until we come to Asvaghosa,

the first known Kavya-poet of eminence, who is made a contemporary

of Kaniska by both Chinese and Tibetan traditions, and

who can be placed even on independent grounds

"

between

50 B.C. and 100 A.D. with a preference to the first half of the

first century A.D." 2 An examination of Asvaghosa's works,

1 in ZDMG, XXXVIII, pp. 616-17.

2 See Buddha-carita, ed. E. H. Johnston (Calcutta, 1936), Pfc. II, iutrod., pp. xiii-xviJ

however, shows * that although they are free from the later

device of overgrown compounds, they betray an unmistakable

knowledge, even in a somewhat rough and primitive form, of

the laws of Kavya poetry, by their skill in the use of classical

metres,

2

by their handling of similes and other rhetorical figures,

and by their growing employment of the stanza as a separate

unit of expression.

A little later, we have a fairly extensive Sanskrit inscription,

carved on a rock at Girnar, of Mahaksatrapa Rudradaman, 3

celebrating an event of about 150 A.D. and composed in the

ornate Sanskrit prose familiar to us from the Kavya. The

literary merit of this Prasasti cannot be reckoned very high,

but it is important as one of the earliest definite instances of

high-flown Sanskrit prose composition. The inscription contains

a reference to the king's skill in the composition of

"

prose and

verse embellished and elevated by verbal conventions, which

are clear, light, pleasant, varied and charming/'

4 Making

allowance for heightened statement not unusual in mscriptional

panegyric, the reference can be taken as an interesting evidence

of the early interest in Sanskrit culture evinced even by a king

of foreign extraction. One can also see in the reference at

least the author's, if not his patron's, acquaintance with some

form of poetic art which prescribed poetic embellishment (Alamkara)

and conventional adjustment of words (Sabda-samaya),

involving the employment of such excellences as clearness, lighton

the d<*te of Kaniska a summary of the divergent views, with full references, is given by

Winternitz, History of Indian Literature (referred to below as H!L) t II, Calcutta, 1983,

pp 611*11. The limits of divergence are now no longer very large, and the date 100 A,D.

would be a rough but not unjust estimate.

1 E. H. Johnston, op. cit. t pp. Ixiii f.

8 Among the metres used (besides classical Anustubh) are Upa;'Sti, Vams'asthavila,

Rucira, PrahirsinT, Vasantatilaka, Malinl, Sikharini, SardulavikrTdita, Suvadanft, Viyogint

or SuodarT, Aup ccbandasika, Vaitalfya, PufjpitS^ra, and even unknown metres like $arabh&,

and rare and difficult ones like Kusnmalatavellita (called Citralekhft by Bharata), Udgata and

Upaathitopracupita.

3 El, VIII, p. 36f.

*

sphuta-laghu-madhura-citra-jkanta sabda&amayodaT&laipkrta>gadya padya*.

ORIGINS AND CHARACTERISTICS 15

ness, sweetness, variety, charm and elevation. It is notable

that the composition itself is not free from archaisms like

patina (for patya), Prakritisms like vUaduttarani (for vimhd-) or

irregular construction like anyatra samgramesu ; but in respect

of the employment of long sentences and sonorous compounds, of

poetic figures like simile and alliteration, and of other literary

devices, it exemplifies some of the distinctive characteristics of

the Sanskrit Kavya. TheNasik inscription of Siri Pulumayi

1

also belongs to the 2nd century A.D. and exhibits similar features,

but it is composed in Prakrit, apparently by one who was familiar

with Sanskrit models.

Not very far perhaps in time from A^vaghosa flourished the

Buddhist writers, Matrceta, Kumaralata and Arya Sura, whose

works, so far as they have been recovered, afford conclusive

evidence of the establishment of the Kavya style. To the third

or fourth century A.D. is also assigned the Tantrakhyayika,

which is the earliest known form of the Pancatantra ; and the

oldest ingredients of the Sattasal of Hala and the Brhatkatha of

of Gunadhya also belong probably to this period. It would also

be not wrong to assume that the sciences of Erotics and Dramaturgy,

typified by the works of Vatsyayana and Bharata, took

shape during this time ; and, though we do not possess any very

early treatise on Poetics, the unknown beginnings of the discipline

are to be sought also in this period, which saw the growth

of the factitious Kavya. The Artha-ustra of Kautilya is placed

somewhat earlier, but the development of political and administrative

ideas must have proceeded apace with the growth of material

prosperity and with the predominance of an entirely secular

literature.

We have, however, no historical authority for the date of any

of these works, nor of the great Kavya-poets, until we come

to the Aihole inscription of 634 A.D.,

2 which mentions Bharavi,

1 Elt VIII, p. COf.

? #/, vi, p. if.

along with Kalidasa, as poets of established reputation. Kalidasa,

however, speaking modestly of himself at the commencement

of his Malavikagnimitra, mentions Bhasa, Somila (or

Saumilla) and Kaviputra as predecessors whose works might

delay the appreciation of his own drama , Although agreement

has not yet been reached about the authenticity of the

Trivandrum dramas ascribed to Bhasa, there cannot be any

doubt that a dramatist Bhasa attained, even in this early period,

a reputation high enough to be eulogised by Kfilidasa, and later

on by Banabhatta. Of Somila we know from Bajasekhara

1

that he was the joint author, with Ramila,2 of a 8iidraka-katha,

which is now lost ; and only one verse of theirs is preserved by

Jahlana (59. 35) and Sanigadhara (No. 3822) in their anthologies.

8 Of Kaviputra also, who is cited in the dual, we have

nothing but one verse only, given in the Subhasitavali (No. 2227),

but the verse now stands in Bhartrhari's tfatakas (Snigara ,

st. 3)

A definite landmark, however, is supplied by the Harsa-carita

of Banabhatta who, as a contemporary of King Harsavardhana

of Thaneswar and Kanauj, belonged to the first half of the 7th

century A.D., and who, in the preface to this work, pays homage

to some of his distinguished predecessors. Besides an unnamed

author of a Vasavadatta, who may or may not be

Subandhu, he mentions Bhattara Haricandra who wrote an

unnamed prose work, Satavahana who compiled an anthology,

Pravarasena whose fame travelled beyond the seas by his Setu

(-bandha), Bhasa who composed some distinctive dramas, Kalidasa

whose flower-like honied words ever bring delight, the

author of the Brhat-hatha, and Adhyaraja. Of Bhattara

1 tan Sudrdkahatha-karau vandyau Ramila-Somilau \ ynyor dvayoh Itavyam asld ardliandrttvaropaman

II , cited in Jahlapa, op cit.

2 One \erseunderIUruilakai8givenby Sbhv, No. 1698. The Sudraka-hatha is mentioned

and quoted by Bhoja in bis Srhgard'prakatia ; ibe name of the heroine is given as

Vinayavati.

3 Tlie stanza, bowever, is given anonymously in Kvs (No. 473) and attributed to

K&ia&kbara in Ston (ii. 86. 6).

ORIGINS AND CHARACTERISTICS 17

Haricandra 2 and Adhyaraja1 we know nothing; but it is clear

that the fame of the remaining well known authors must

have been wide-spread by the 7th century A,D. Although the

respective dates of these works and authors cannot be fixed with

certainty, it can be assumed from Banabhatta's enumeration that

the period preceding him formed one of the most distinguished

epochs of Kavya literature, the development of which probably

proceeded apace with the flourishing of Sanskrit culture under the

Gupta emperors in the 4th and 5th centuries of the Christian

era.

This conclusion receives confirmation from the wide cultivation

of the Kavya form of prose and verse in the inscriptional

records of this period, of which not less than fifteen

specimens of importance will be found in the third volume of

Fleet's Corpus Inscriptionum Indicarum* Their Kavya-features

and importance in literary history have long since been ably

discussed by Biihler.

4 His detailed examination not only proves

the existence of a body of elaborate prose and metrical writings

in Kavya-style during these centuries, but also shows that the

manner in which these Prasasti-writers conform to the rules

of Alamkara, crystallised later in the oldest available treatises

like those of Bhainaha and Dandin, would establish the

presumption of their acquaintance with some rules of Sanskrit

1 Most scholars have accepted Pischel's contention (Nachrichten d. kgl. GeselUchaft d.

Wissenschaften Gottingen, 1901, p. 486 f.) that the word ddhyardja in st. 18 is not a

proper name of any poet but refers to the poet's patron King Harsa himself. Bat the verse

has difficulties of interpretation, for which see F. W. Thomas and others in JRAS, 1903,

p. 803; 1904, p. 155 f., 366, 544; 1905, p. 569 f. We also know from a stanza quoted in the

Sarasvatt-kanthabharana that there was a Prakrit poet named Adhyaraja, who is mentioned

along with Sahasftfika; the commentary, however, explaining in a facile way that Adhyaraja

stands for Sftlivahana and Sahas&nka for Vikrama !

* He is certainly not the Jaina Haricandra, author of the much later Dharmaarmabhyudaya

which gives a dull account of the saint Dharmanatha (ed. N8P, Bombay, 1899). Our

Haricandra is apparently mentioned in a list of great poets in Skm (5. 26. 5), and quoted in

the anthologies.

3 Calcutta, 1888. Some of these inscriptional records will be found in a convenient

form in DevanSgarl in D. B. Diskalkar's Selections from Inscriptions, Vol. I (Eajkol, 1925),

* In Die indischen Inschriftin, cited above.

-1343B

poetics.. The most interesting of these inscriptions is the

panegyric of Samudragupta by Harisena, engraved on a

pillar at Allahabad (about 350 A.D.), which commences with

eight stanzas (some fragmentary) describing vividly the death of

Candragupta I and accession of his son Samudragupta, then

passes over to one long sonorous prose sentence and winds up

with an eulogistic stanza, all composed in the best manner of

the Kavya. Likewise remarkable is the inscription of Virasena,

the minister of Candragupta II, Samudragupta' s successor.

Some importance attaches also to the inscription of Vatsabhatti^

which consists of a series of 44 stanzas celebrating (in 473 A.D.)

the consecration of a Sun-temple at Dagapura (Mandasor), from

the fact that the poetaster is alleged to have taken Kalidasa as

his model ; but the literary merit of this laboured composition

need not be exaggerated.

2. THE ENVIRONMENT AND CHARACTERISTICS OF THE KAVYA

It is noteworthy that in Harisena' s Pra&isti, Samudragupta

is mentioned not only as a friend and patron of poets but as a

poet himself, who like Kudradaman before him, composed poems

of distinction enough to win for himself tbe title of Kaviraja or

king of poets.

1 Amiable flattery it may be^ but the point is

important ; for, the tradition of royal authors, as well as of royal

patrons of authors, continues throughout the history of Sanskrit

literature. The very existence of rdyal inscriptions written in

Kavya-style, as well as the form, content and general outlook

of the Kavya literature itself indicates its close connexion with

the courts of princes, and explains the association of Agvaghosa

with Kaniska, of Kalidasa with a Vikramaditya, or of Banabhatta

with Harsavardhana. The royal recognition not only

brought wealth and fame to the poets, but also some leisure for

i For other examples of poet-kings see 'introduction to the edition of Priyadartika bj

Nsriman, Jackon and Ogden, pp. xxxv-xxxix.

ORIGINS AND CHARACTERISTICS 10

serious composition. In his Kavya-mimamsa R5jaekhara

speaks of literary assemblies held by kings for examination of

works and reward of merit ; and even if we do not put faith in

this or in the unhistorical pictures of poetical contests at royal

courts given in the Bhoja-prabandha and Prabandha-cintdmaniz

a vivid account is furnished by Maftkha in his Srlkanlha-carita

(Canto XV) of one such assembly actually held by a minister of

Jayasimha of Kashmir towards the middle of the 12th century.

As a matter of fact, the Kavya literature appears to have been

aristocratic from the beginning, fostered under the patronage of

the wealthy or in the courts of the princes. Even if it does not

lack serious interest, this literature naturally reflects the graces,

as well as the artificialities, of courtly life ; and its exuberant

fancy is quite in keeping with the taste which prevailed in this

atmosphere. The court-influence undoubtedly went a long way,

not only in fostering a certain langour and luxuriance of style,

but also in encouraging a marked preference of what catches the

the eye to what touches the heart.

In order to appreciate the Kavya, therefore, it is necessary

to realise the condition under which it was produced and the

environment in which it flourished. The pessimism of the

Buddhistic ideal gradually disappeared^ having been replaced by

more accommodating views about the value of pleasure. Even

the Buddhist author of the Nagdnanda does not disdain to weave

a love-theme into his lofty story of Jimutavahana's self-sacrifice ;

and in his opening benedictory stanza he does not hesitate to

represent the Buddha as being rallied upon his hard-heartedness

by the ladies of Mara's train. 1 From Patanjali's references we

find that from its very dawn love is established as one of the

dominant themes of the Kavya poetry.

2 The Buddhist conception

1 A similar verse with openly erotic imagery is ascribed to A6vaghos.a in Kvs No. 2.

2 One fragment, at least, of a stanza is clearly erotic in subject in its description of the

morning : varatanu sarypravadanti hukkutah "0 fair-limbed one, the cocks unite to proclaim ".

The full verse is fortunately supplied twelve centuries later by Ks.emendra, who quotes it In

his Aucitya-vicara but attributes it, wrongly to KumSradasa.

of the love-god as Mara or Death gives way to that of the flowerarrowed

deity, who is anticipated in the Atharva-veda and is

established in the Epics, but whose appearance, names and

personality are revived and developed in the fullest measure in

the Kavya. The widely diffused Kavya manner and its prevailing

love-interest invade even the domain of technical sciences ;

and it is remarkable that the mathematician Bbaskaragupta not

only uses elegant metres in his Lllavatl but presents his algebraical

theorems in the form of problems explained to a fair maiden,

of which the phraseology and imagery are drawn from the bees,

flowers and other familiar objects of Kavya poetry. The celebration

of festivals with pomp and grandeur, the amusements of

the court and the people, the sports in water, the game of

swing, the plucking of flowers, song, dance, music, dramatic

performances and other diversions, elaborate description of which

forms the stock-in-trade of most Kavya-poets, bear witness not

only to this new sense of life but also to the general demand for

refinement, beauty and luxury. The people are capable of

enjoying the good things of this world, while heartily believing

in the next. If pleasure with refinement is sought for in life,

pleasure with elegance is demanded in art. It is natural, therefore,

that the poetry of this period pleases us more than it moves;

for life is seldom envisaged in its infinite depth and poignancy, or

in its sublime heights of imaginative fervour, but is generally

conceived in its playful moods of vivid enjoyment breaking

forth into delicate little cameos of thought or fancy.

The dominant love-motif of the Kavya is thus explained by

the social environment in which it grows and from which alone

it can obtain recognition . It is, however, not court-life alone

which inspires this literature. At the centre of it stands the

Nagaraka, the polished man about town, whose culture, tastes

and habits so largely mould this literature that he may be taken

to be as typical of it as the priest or the philosopher is of the

literature of the Brahmanas or the Upani^ads.

1

Apart from the

1 H. Qldenberg, Die Literal des aUen Indien, Stuttgart und Berlin, 1908, pp. 198 f.

ORIGINS AND CHARACTERISTICS 21

picture we get of him in the literature itself, we have a vivid

sketch of an early prototype of the Nagaraka in the Kama-sutra

or Aphorism of Erotics, attributed to Vatsyayana. We are told

that the well planned house of the Nagaraka is situated near a

river or tank and surrounded by a lovely garden; in the garden

there are, for amusement or repose, a summer house, a bower of

creepers with raised parterre, and a carpeted swing in a shady

spot. His living room, balmy with perfume, contains a bed,

soft, white, fragrant and luxuriously furnished with pillows or

cushions. There is also a couch, with a kind of stool at the head,

on which are placed pigments, perfumes, garlands, bark of citron^

canvas and a box of paint, A lute hanging from an ivory peg

and a few books are also not forgotten. On the ground there is a

spittoon, and not far from the couch a round seat with raised

back and a board for dice. The Nagaraka spends his morning in

bathing and elaborate toilet, applying ointments and perfumes to

his body, collyriuin to his eyes and red paint to his lips, chewing

betel leaves and citron-bark to add fragrance to his mouth, and

looking at himself in the glass. After breakfast he listens to

his parrots, kept in a cage outside his room, witnesses ram and

cock fights and takes part in other diversions which he enjoys

with his friends and companions. After a brief midday sleep, he

dresses again, and joins his friends ; and in the evening there

is music, followed by joys of love. These are the habitual

pleasures of the Nagaraka, but there are also occasional rounds of

enjoyment, consisting of festivals, drinking parties, plays, concerts,

picnics in groves, excursions to parks or water-sports in

lakes and rivers. There are also social gatherings, often held in

the house of the ladies of the demi-monde, where assemble men

of wit and talent, and where artistic and poetic topics are freely

discussed. The part played by the accomplished courtesan in the

polished society of the time is indeed remarkable ; and judging

from Vasantasena,

1

it must be said that in ancient India of this

1 Also the picture of Kamamafijari in Ucchvasa II of Darin's romance; she if a

typical couxteian, but highly accomplished and eduetied.

period, as in the Athens of Perikles, her wealth, beauty and

power, as well as her literary and artistic tastes, assured for her

an important social position. She already appears as a character

in the fragment of an early Sanskrit play discovered in Central

Asia, and it is not strange that Sudraka should take her as the

heroine of his well known drama; for her presence and position

must have offered an opportunity, which is otherwise denied to

the Sanskrit dramatist (except through a legendary medium) of

depicting romantic love between persons free and independent.

The picture of the Nagaraka and his lady-friend, as we have it in

literature, is undoubtedly heightened, and there is a great deal of

the dandy and the dilettante in the society which they frequent;

but we need not doubt that there is also much genuine culture,

character and refinement. In later times, the Nagaraka degenerates

into a professional amourist, but originally he is depicted as

a perfect man of the world, rich and cultivated, as well as witty,

polished and skilled in the arts, who can appreciate poetry,

painting and music, discuss delicate problems in the doctrine of

love and has an extensive experience of human, especially feminine,

character.

The science of Erotics, thus, exercised a profound influence

on the theory and practice of the poetry of this period. The

standard work of Vatsyayana contains, besides several chapters on

the art and practice of love, sections on the ways and means of

winning and keeping a lover, on courtship and signs of love, on

marriage and conduct of married life, and not a little on the

practical psychology of the emotion of love. On the last mentioned

topic the science of Poetics, as embodied particularly in

the specialised works on the erotic Rasa, went hand in hand; and

it is almost impossible to appreciate fully the merits, as well as

the defects, of Sanskrit love-poetry without some knowledge of

the habits, modes of thought, literary traditions and fundamental

poetical postulates recorded in these Sastras, the mere allusion to

one of which is enough to call up some familiar idea or touch

some inner chord of sentiment. There is much in these treatises

ORIGINS AND CHARACTERISTICS ' 23

which gives us an idealised or fanciful picture ; and the existence

of the people of whom they speak was just as little a prolonged

debauch as a prolonged idyll. There is also a great deal of scholastic

formalism which loves subtleties and minutiae of classification.

At the same time, the works bear witness to a considerable

power of observation, and succeed in presenting a skilful and

elaborate analysis of the erotic emotion, the theory of which came

to have an intimate bearing on the practice of the poets.

In this connexion a reference should be made to an aspect

of Sanskrit love-poetry which has been often condemned as too

sensual or gross, namely, its highly intimate description of the

beauty of the feminine form and the delights of dalliance, as

well as its daring indelicacies of expression. It should be recognised

that much of this frankness is conventional ; the Sanskrit

poet is expected to show his skill and knowledge of the Kama-

3astra by his minute and highly flavoured descriptions. But the

excuse of convention cannot altogether condone the finical yet

flaunting sensuality of the elaborate picture of love-sports, such

as we find in Bharavi, Magha and their many followers (including

the composers of later Bhanas) and such as are admitted by

a developed but deplorable taste. Even the Indian critics, who

are not ordinarily squeamish, are not sparing in their condemnation

of some of these passages, and take even Kalidasa to task

for depicting the love-adventures of the divine pair in his

Kumara-sambhava. A distinction, however, must be drawn

between this conventional, but polished, and perhaps all the more

regrettable, indecency of decadent poets, on the one band, and

the exasperatingly authentic and even blunt audacities of expression,

on the other, with which old-time authors season their

erotic compositions. What the latter-day poets lack is the naive

exuberance or bonhomie of their predecessors, their easy and

frank expression of physical affection in its exceedingly human

aspect, and their sincere realisation of primal sensations, which

are naturally gross or grotesque being nearer to life. It would

be unjust ad canting prudery to condemn these simpler moods

of passion and their direct expression, unless they are meaninglessly

vulgar. The point is too often forgotten that what we

have here is not the love which dies in dreams, or revels in the

mystic adoration of a phantom-woman. It does not talk about

ideals and gates of heaven but walks on the earth and speaks of

the passionate hunger of the body and the exquisite intoxication

of the senses. The poets undoubtedly put a large emphasis on

the body, and love appears more as self-fulfilment than as selfabnegation

; but in this preference of the body there is nothing

debasing or prurient. The essential realism of passion, which

cannot live on abstraction but must have actualities to feed upon,

does not absolve a truly passionate poet from the contact of the

senses and touch of the earth ; but from this, his poetry springs

Antaeus-like into fuller being. Modern taste may, with reason,

deprecate the intimate description of personal beauty and delights

of love in later Sanskrit poetry, but even here it must be clearly

understood that there is very seldom any ignoble motive behind

its conventional sensuousness, that there is no evidence of

delight in uncleanness, and that it always conforms to the

standard of artistic beauty. Comparing Sanskrit poetry with

European classical literature in this respect, a Western critic

very rightly remarks that

"

there is all the world of difference

between what we find in the great poets of India and the frank

delight of Martial and Petronius in their descriptions of immoral

scenes." The code of propriety as well as of prudery differs

with different people, but the Sanskrit poet seldom takes leave

of his delicacy of feeling and his sense of art ; and even if he

is ardent and luxuriant, he is more openly exhilarating than

offensively cynical.

The Sanskrit poet cannot also forget that, beside his

elegant royal "patron and the cultivated Nagaraka, he had a more

exacting audience in the Easika or Sahrdaya, the man of taste,

the connoisseur, whose expert literary judgment is the final test

of his work. Such a critic, we are told, must not only possess

technical knowledge of the requirements of poetry, but also a

ORIGINS AND CHARACTERISTICS 25

fine capacity of aesthetic enjoyment, born of wide culture

and sympathetic identification with the feelings and ideas of

the poet. The Indian ideal of the excellence of poetry is

closely associated with a peculiar condition of artistic enjoyment,

known as Rasa, the suggestion of which is taken to be

its function, and in relation to which the appreciator is called

Rasika. It is a reflex of the sentiment, which has been suggested

in the poem, in the mind of the appreciator, as a relishable

condition of impersonal enjoyment resulting from the idealised

creation of poetry. The evoking of sentiment, therefore, is

considered to be the most vital function of poetry ; and stress is

put more and more on sentimental composition to the exclusion

of the descriptive or ornamental. But here also the theorists

are emphatic that in the art of suggesting this sentimental

enjoyment in the reader's mind, the poetic imagination must

show itself. As Oldenberg

1 remarks with insight, the Indian

theorists permit intellectual vigour and subtlety^ the masculine

beauty, to stand behind that of the purely feminine enjoyment

born of the finest sensibility. Both these traits are found in the

literature from the beginning the idea of delectable rapture

side by side with a strong inclination towards sagacity and

subtlety. It is true that the dogmatic formalism of a scholastic

theory of poetry sinks to the level of a cold and monotonously

inflated rhetoric ; but the theorists are at the same time not

blind to finer issues, nor are they indifferent to the supreme

excellence of real poetry

* and the aesthetic pleasure resulting

from it. They take care to add that, despite dogmas and

formulas, the poetic imagination must manifest itself as the

ultimate source of poetic charm. The demands that are made

of the poet are, thus, very exacting; he must not only be

initiated into the intricacies of theoretic requirements but

must also possess poetic imagination (Sakti), aided by culture

1 Die Literatur des alien Indian, p. 207 f.

2

Of. Anandavardhana, p. 29 : asminn ati'Vicitra-kavipararppara-vahini sarfi$&re K&li*

dasa-prabhrtayo dvitra paflcatQ, va maliakavaya ttt ganyate.

4 1343B

(Vyutpatti) and practice (Abhyasa). Even if we do not rely

upon Rajagekhara's elaborate account of the studies which

go to make up the finished poet, there can be no doubt

that considerable importance is attached to the

"

education' 1

of

the poet,

1 whose inborn gifts alone would not suffice, and for

whose practical guidance in the devices of the craft, convenient

manuals 2 are elaborately composed.

It is not necessary to believe that the poet is actually an

adept in the long list of arts and sciences 8 in which he is required

to be proficient ; but it is clear that he is expected to possess (and

be is anxious to show that he does possess) a vast fund of useful

information in the various branches of learning. Literature is

regarded more and more as a learned pursuit and as the product

of much cultivation. No doubt, a distinction is made between

the Vidvat and the Vidagdha, between a man versed in belleslettres

and a dry and tasteless scholar ; but it soon becomes a

distinction without much difference. The importance of inspiration

is indeed recognised, but the necessity of appealing to a

learned audience is always there. It is obvious that in such an

atmosphere the literature becomes; rich and refined, but natural

i See F. W. Thomas, Bhandarkar Com,n. Volume, p. 397 f ; S. K. De, Sanskrit Poetics,

II, pp. 357 f, 42 f.n., 52; Keith, HSL, pp. &38-41. Raja^ekbara gives an interesting, but

gome what heightened, picture of the daily life and duties of the poet, who is presented as a

man of fashion and wealth, of purity in body, mind and speech, but assiduous and hardworking

at his occupation.

* These works furnish elaborate hints on the construction of different metres, on the display

of word-skill of various kinds, on jeux de mot* and tricks of producing double meaning,

conundrums, riddles, alliterative and chiming verses, and various other devices of verbal ingenuity.

They give instructions on the employment of similes and enumerate a large number

of .ordinary parallelisms for that purpose. They give lists of Kavi-samayas or conventions

observed by poets, and state in detail what to describe and how to describe.

5 The earliest of such lists is given by Bbamaha I. 9, which substantially agrees

with that of Rudrata (1. 18^ ; but Vamana (1.8.20-21) deals with the topic in some detail. The

longest list includes Grammar, Lexicon, Metrics, Ehetoric, Arts, Dramaturgy," Morals, Erotics

Politics* Law, Logic, Legends, Religion and Philosophy, as well as such miscellaneous subjects

as Medicine, Botany, Mineralogy, knowledge of precious stones, Elephant-lore, Veterinary

science, Art of War and Weapons, Art of Gambling, Magic, Astrology and Astronomy,

knowledge of Vedic rites and ceremonies, and of the ways of the world,

ORIGINS AND CHARACTERISTICS 27

ease and spontaneity are sacrificed for studied effects, and refinement

leads perforce to elaboration.

The Kavya, therefore, appears almost from its very beginning

as the careful work of a trained and experienced specialist.

The technical analysis of a somewhat mechanical Ehetoric leads

to the working of the rules and means of the poetic art into a

system ; and this is combined with a characteristic love of adornment,

which demands an ornamental fitting out of word and

thought. The difficulty of the language, as well as its complexity,

naturally involves prolonged endeavour and practice for

effective mastery, but it also affords endless opportunity and

temptation for astonishing feats of verbal jugglery, which

perhaps would not be possible in any other language less accommodating

than Sanskrit. Leaving aside the grotesque experiments

of producing verses in the shape of a sword, wheel or lotus, or of

stanzas which have the same sounds when read forwards or backwards,

and other such verbal absurdities, the tricks in poetic

form and decorative devices are undoubtedly clever, but they are

often overdone. They display learned ingenuity more than real

poetry, and the forced use of the language is often a barrier to

quick comprehension. Some poets actually go to the length of

boasting

1 that their poem is meant for the learned and not for

the dull-witted, and is understandable only by means of a commentary.

2 The involved construction, recondite vocabulary,

laboured embellishment, strained expression, and constant search

after conceits, double meanings and metaphors undoubtedly

justify their boasting; but they evince an exuberance of fancy

and erudition rather than taste, judgment and real feeling.

This tendency is more and more encouraged by the elaborate

rules and definitions of Khetoric, until inborn poetic fervour is

1 E.g. Blia\ti, XXII. 34 ; vyakhya-gamyam idam kdvyam utsavah sttdhiyam a/am \ hatt

durmedhasat cfomin vidvat-priyataya naya II . Here the Vidagdha is ignored deliberately for

the Vidvaf.

2 Some authors had, in fact, to write their own commentaries to make themselves intelligible.

Even Xnandavardhana who deprecates Buch tricks in his theoretical work does

not steer clear of them in his Dem-tataka.

entirely obscured by technicalities of expression. In actual

practice, no doubt, gifted poets aspire to untrammelled utterance;

but the general tendency degenerates towards a slavish adherence

to rules, which results in the overloading of a composition by

complicated and laboured expressions.

Comments have often been made on the limited range and

outlook of Sanskrit literature and on the conventionality of its

themes. It is partly the excessive love of form and expression

which leads to a corresponding neglect of content and theme.

It is of little account if the subject-matter is too thin and

threadbare to support a long poem, or if the irrelevant and often

commonplace descriptions and reflections hamper the course of

the narrative; what does matter is that the diction is elaborately

perfect, polished and witty, and that the poem conforms to the

recognised standard,

1 and contains the customary descriptions,

however digressive, of spring, dawn, sunset, moonrise, watersports,

drinking bouts, amorous practices, diplomatic consultations

and military expeditions, which form the regular stock-intrade

of this ornate poetry. A large number of so-called poetic

conventions (Kavi-samayas)

2 are established by theorists

and mechanically repeated by poets, while descriptions of

things, qualities and actions are stereotyped by fixed epithets,

cliche phrases and restricted formulas. Even the various motifs

which occur in legends, fables and plays

8 are worn out by repeti-

J See Dan<}in, Kavyadarsa, 1. 14-19 ; Visvanatba, Sdhitya-darpana, VI. 316-25, eta.

2 For a list of poetic conventions see RajaSekhara, Kavya-mimamsa, XIV ; Amaraaimha,

Kavya-kalpalata, I. 5 ; Sahitya-darpana, VII. 23-24, etc. Borne of the commonest artificial conventions

are : the parting of the Cakravaka bird at night from its mate ; the Cakora feeding

on the moonbeams; the blooming of the As*oka at the touch of a lady 'a feet; fame and

laughter described as white ; the flower-bow and bee-string of the god of love, etc. Originally

the writers on poetics appear to have regarded these as established by the bold usage of the

poet (kavi-praudhokti'siddha), but they are gradually stereotyped as poetical commonplaces.

3 Such as the vision of the beloved in a dream, the talking parrot, the magic steed, the

fatal effect of an ascetic's curse, transformation of shapes, change of sex, the art of entering

into another's body, the voice in the air, the token of recognition, royal love for a lowly

maiden and the ultimate discovery of her real status as a princess, minute portraituie of the

heroine's personal beauty and the generous qualities of the hero, description of pangs of

thwarted love and sentimental longing. M. Bloomfield (Festscrift Ernst Windi*ch> Leipzig,

OtllGINS AND CHARACTERISTICS 29

tion and lose thereby their element of surprise and charm. The

question of imitation, borrowing or plagiarism

1

of words or ideas

assumes importance in this connexion ; for it involves a test of

the power of clever reproduction, or sometimes a criticism of

some weakness in the passages consciously appropriated but

improved in the course of appropriation.

The rigidity, which these commonplaces of conventional

rhetoric acquire, is the result, as well as the cause, of the timehonoured

tendency of exalting authority and discouraging originality,

which is a remarkable characteristic of Indian culture in

general and of its literature in particular, and which carries the

suppression of individuality too far. It is in agreement with

this attitude that Sanskrit Poetics neglects a most vital aspect of

its task, namely, tfce study of poetry as the individualised expression

of the poet's mind, and confines itself more or less to a

normative doctrine of technique, to the formulation of laws,

modes and models, to the collection and definition of facts and

categories and to the teaching of the means of poetic expression.

This limitation not only hinders the growth of Sanskrit Poetics

into a proper study of Aesthetic,

2 but it also stands in the way

of a proper appreciation and development of Sanskrit literature.

The theory almost entirely ignores the poetic personality in a

work of art, which gives it its particular shape and individual

character. Sanskrit Poetics cannot explain satisfactorily, for

1914, pp. 349-61; JAOS, XXXVI, 1917, p. 51-89; XL, 1920, pp. 1-24; XLIV, 1924, pp. 202-42),

W.Norman Brown (JAOS, XLVII, 1927, pp. 3-24), Penzer (in his ed. of Tawney's trs. of

Katha-sarit-safjara, 'Ocean of Story ') and others have studied in detail some of these motifs

recurring in Sanskrit literature. Also see Bloomfield in Amer. Journ. of Philology, XL, pp.

1-86 ; XLI, pp. 309-86 ; XLIV, pp. 97-133, 193-229 ; XLVII, pp. 205-233 ; W. N. Brown in ibid.,

XL, pp. 423-30 ; XLTI, pp.122-51 ; XLIII, pp . 289-317 ; Studien in Honour of M. Bloomfield,

pp. 89-104, 211-24 (Ruth Norton) ; B. H. Burlingaine in JRAS, 1917, pp. 429-67, etc.

1 The question ia discussed by inandavardhana, Dhvanyaloka, III. 12 f. ; Raja&khara

Kavya-mimattisa, XI f ; Ksemendra, Kavikanthabharana, II, 1 ; Hemacandra, Katyanu6asana

pp. 8 f . See S. K. De, Sanskrit Poetics, II, pp. 362, 373.

2 See S. K, De, Sanskrit Poetics as a Study of Aesthetic in Dacca University Studies,

Vol. 1, No. 2, pp. 80-124.

instance, the simple question as to why the work of one poet is

not the same in character as that of another, or why two works

of the same poet are not the same. To the Sanskrit theorist a

composition is a work of art if it fulfils the prescribed requirements

of 'qualities,' of 'ornaments,' of particular arrangements

of words to suggest a sense or a sentiment ; it is immaterial

whether the work in question is Raghu~vam,$a or Naisadha. The

main difference which he will probably see between these two

works will probably consist of the formal employment of this or

that mode of diction, or in their respective skill of suggesting

this or that meaning of the words. The theorists never bother

themselves about the poetic imagination, which gives each a

distinct and unique shape by a fusion of impressions into an

organic, and not a mechanic, whole. No doubt, they solemnly

affirm the necessity of Pratibha or poetic imagination, but in

their theories the Pratibha does not assume any important or

essential role ; and in practical application they go further and

speak of making a poet into a poet. But it is forgotten that a

work of art is the expression of individuality, and that individuality

never repeats itself nor conforms to a prescribed mould. It

is hardly recognised that what appeals to us in a poem is the

poetic personality which reveals itself in the warmth, movement

and integrity of imagination and expression. No doubt, the poet

can astonish us with his wealth of facts and nobility of thought,

or with his cleverness in the manipulation of the language, but

this is not what we ask of a poet. What we want is the expression

of a poetic mind, in contact with which our minds may be

moved. If this is wanting, we call his work dull, cold or flat,

and all the learning, thought or moralising in the world cannot

save a work from being a failure. The Sanskrit theorists justly

remark that culture and skill should assist poetic power or personality

to reveal itself in its proper form, but what they fail to

emphasise is that any amount of culture and skill cannot 'make'

a poet, and that a powerful poetic personality must justify a work

of art by itself.

ORIGINS AND CHARACTERISTICS 31

The result is that Sanskrit poetry is made to conform to

certain fixed external standard attainable by culture and practice ;

and the poetic personality or imagination, cramped within prescribed

limits, is hardly allowed the fullest scope or freedom to

create new forms of beauty. Although the rhetoricians put

forward a theory of idealised enjoyment as the highest object of

poetry, yet the padagogic and moralistic objects are enumerated

in unbroken tradition. In conformity with the learned and

scholastic atmosphere in which it flourishes, poetry is valued for

the knowledge it brings or the lessons it inculcates, and is

regarded as a kind of semi-3astra; while the technical analysis and

authority of the rhetorician tend to eliminate the personality of

the poet by mechanising poetry. The exaltation of formal skill

and adherence to the banalities of a formal rhetoric do not

sufficiently recognise that words and ornaments, as symbols,

are inseparable from the poetic imagination, and that,

as such, they are not fixed but mobile, not an embalmed

collection of dead abstractions, but an ever elusive series of

living particulars. Sanskrit literature is little alive to these

considerations, and accepts a normative formulation of poetic

expression. But for the real poet, as for the real speaker, there

is hardly an armoury of ready-made weapons ; he forges his

own weapons to fight his own particular battles.

It must indeed be admitted that the influence of the theorists

on the latter-day poets was not an unmixed good. While the

poetry gained in niceties and subtleties of expression, it lost

a great deal of its unconscious freshness and spontaneity. It

is too often flawed by the very absence of flaws, and its want

of imperfection makes it coldly perfect. One can never deny

that the poet is still a sure and impeccable master of his craft,

but he seldom moves or transports. The pictorial effect, the

musical cadence and the wonderful spell of language are undoubted,

but the poetry is more exquisite than passionate, more studied

and elegant than limpid and forceful. We have heard so much

about the artificiality and tediousness of Sanskrit classical

poetry that it is not necessary to emphasise the point ; but the

point which has not been sufficiently emphasised is that the

Sanskrit poets often succeed in getting out of their very narrow

and conventional material such beautiful effects that criticism

is almost afraid to lay its cold dry finger on these fine blossoms

of fancy. It should not be forgotten that this literature is not

the spontaneous product of an uncritical and ingenuous age,

but that it is composed for a highly cultured audience. It presupposes

a psychology and a rhetoric which have been reduced

to a system, and which possesses a peculiar phraseology and a

set of conceits of their own. We, therefore, meet over and

over again with the same tricks of expression, the same strings

of nouns and adjectives, the same set of situations, the same

groups of conceits and the same system of emotional analysis.

In the lesser poets the sentiment and expression are no longer

fresh and varied but degenerate into rigid artistic conventions.

But the greater poets very often work up even these romantic

commonplaces and agreeable formulas into new shapes of beauty.

Even in the artificial bloom and perfection there is almost always

a strain of the real and ineffable tone of poetry. It would

seem, therefore, that if we leave aside the mere accidents of

poetry, there is no inherent lack of grasp upon its realities. It

is admitted that the themes are narrow, the diction and imagery

are conventional, and the ideas move in a fixed groove ; but the

true poetic spirit is not always wanting, and it is able to transmute

the rhetorical and psychological banalities into fine things

of art.

The Sanskrit poet, for instance, seldom loses an opportunity

of making a wonderful use of the sheer beauty of words and

their inherent melody, of which Sanskrit is so capable. The

production of fine sound-effects by a delicate adjustment of word

and sense is an art which is practised almost to prefection. It

cannot be denied that some poets are industrious pedants in

their strict conformity to rules and perpetrate real atrocities by

their lack of subtlety and taste in matching the sense to

ORIGINS AND CHARACTERISTICS 33

the sound ; but, generally speaking, one must agree with the

appreciative remarks of a Western critic that

"

the classical

poets of India have a sensitiveness to variations of sound, to

which literatures of other countries afford few parallels, and theii

delicate combinations are a source of never-failing joy". The

extraordinary flexibility of the language and complete mastery

over it make this possible ; and the theory which classifies

Sanskrit diction on the basis of sound-effects and prescribes

careful rules about them is not altogether futile or pedantic.

One of the means elaborately employed for achieving this end

is the use of alliteration and assonance of various kinds. Such

verbal devices, no doubt, become flat or fatiguing in meaningless

repetition, but in skilled hands they produce remarkable

effects which are perhaps not attainable to the same extent in

any other language. Similar remarks apply to the fondness

for paronomasia or double meaning, which the uncommon

resources of Sanskrit permit. In languages like English,

punning lends itself chiefly to comic effects and witticisms or,

as in Shakespeare

1

! to an occasional flash of dramatic feeling;

but in classical languages it is capable of serious employment as a

fine artistic device.2 It is true that it demands an intellectual

strain disproportionate to the aesthetic pleasure, and becomes

tiresome and ineffective in the incredible and incessant torturing

of the language found in such lengthy triumphs of misplaced

ingenuity as those of Subandhu and Kaviraja ; but sparingly

and judiciously used, the puns are often delightful in their terse

brevity and twofold appropriateness. The adequacy of the

language and its wonderful capacity for verbal melody are also

utilised by the Sanskrit poet in a large number of lyrical measures

of great complexity, which are employed with remarkable skill

and^ense of rhythm in creating an unparalleled series of musical

word-pictures.

i Merchant of Venice, IV. 1, 123 ; Julius Caeser, I. 2, 156 (Globe Ed.),

1

C/. Darin's dictum : ttesali pttsnati sarv&su prayo vakrokii*u triyam.

0-1348B

The elegance and picturesqueness of diction are, again,

often enhanced by the rolling majesty of long compounds, the

capacity for which is inherent in the genius of Sanskrit

and developed to the fullest extent. The predilection for

long compounds, especially in ornate prose, is indeed often

carried to absurd excesses, and is justly criticised for the

construction of vast sentences extending over several pages and

for the trick of heaping epithet upon epithet in sesquipedalian

grandeur ; but the misuse of this effective instrument of synthetic

expression should not make us forget the extraordinary power of

compression and production of unified picture which it can

efficiently realise. It permits a subtle combination of the

different elements of a thought or a picture into a perfect whole,

in which the parts coalesce by inner necessity ; and it has been

rightly remarked that

"

the impression thus created on the

mind cannot be reproduced in an analytical speech like English,

in which it is necessary to convey the same content, not in a

single sentence syntactically merged into a whole, like the idea

which it expresses, but in a series of loosely connected predications

' f

. Such well-knit compactness prevents the sentences from

being jerky, flaccid or febrile, and produces undoubted sonority,

dignity and magnificence of diction, for which Sanskrit is always

remarkable, and which cannot be fully appreciated by one who

is accustomed to modern analytical languages.

The inordinate length of ornate prose sentences is set off by

the brilliant condensation of style which is best seen in the

gnomic and epigrammatic stanzas, expressive of maxims of

sententious wisdom with elaborate terseness and flash of wit.

The compact neatness of paronomasia, antithesis and other verbal

figures often enhances the impressiveness of these pithy sayings;

and their vivid precision is not seldom rounded off by appropriate

similes and metaphors. The search for metaphorical expression

is almost a weakness with the Sanskrit poets ; but, unless it is a

deliberately pedantic artifice, the force and beauty with which it

is employed canpot be easily denied. The various forjns of

ORIGINS AND CHARACTERISTICS 35

metaphors and similes are often a source of fine surprise by their

power of happy phraseology and richness of poetical fancy.

The similarities, drawn from a fairly wide range, often display

a real freshness of observation, though some of them become

familiar conventions in later poetry ; and comparison in some

form or other becomes one of the most effective means of

stimulating the reader's imagination by suggesting more than

what is said. When the similarity is purely verbal, it is witty

and neat, but the poet seldom forgets to fit his comparison to the

emotional content or situation.

Closely connected with this is the power of miniature

painting, compressed in a solitary stanza, which is a characteristic

of the Kavya and in which the Sanskrit poets excel to a

marvellous degree. In the epic, the necessity of a continuous

recitation, which should flow evenly and should not demand too

great a strain on the audience, makes the poet alive to the unity

of effect to be produced by subordinating the consecutive stanzas

to the narrative as a whole. The method which is evolved in the

Kavya is different. No doubt, early poets like Agvagbosa and

Kalidasa do not entirely neglect effective narration, but the later

Kavya attaches hardly any importance to the theme or story and

depends almost exclusively on the appeal of art finically displayed

in individual stanzas. The Kavya becomes a series of miniature

poems or methodical verso-paragraphs, loosely strung on the

thread of the narrative. Each clear-cut stanza is a separate

unit in itself, both grammatically and in sense, and presents a

perfect little picture. Even though spread out over several

cantos, the Kavya really takes the form, not of a systematic and

well knit poem, but of single stanzas, standing by themselves^

in which the poet delights to depict a single idea, a single phase

of emotion, or a single situation in a complete and daintily

finished form. If this tradition, of the stanza-form is not fully

satisfactory in a long composition, where unity of effect is

necessary, it is best exemplified in the verse-portion of the

dramas^, as well as in the Satakas, such as those of Bhartfhari and

Amaru, in which the Sanskrit poetry of love, resignation or

reflection finds the most effective expression in its varying moods

and phases. Such miniature painting, in which colours are

words, is a task of no small difficulty ; for it involves the perfect

expression, within very restricted limits, of a pregnant idea or an

intense emotion with a few precise and elegant touches.

All this will indicate that the Sanskrit poet is more directly

concerned with the consummate elegance of his art than with any

message or teaching which he is called upon to deliver. It is

indeed not correct to say that the poet does not take any interest

in the great problems of life and destiny, but this is seldom writ

large upon his work of art. Except in the drama which

comprehends a wider and fuller life, he is content with the

elegant symbols of reality rather than strive for the reality itself ;

and his work is very often nothing more than a delicate blossom

of fancy, fostered in a world of tranquil calm. Nothing ruffles

the pervading sense of harmony and concord ; and neither deep

tragedy nor great laughter is to be found in its fulness in Sanskrit

literature. There is very seldom any trace of strife or discontent,

clash of contrary passions and great conflicts ; nor is there any

outburst of rugged feelings, any great impetus for energy and

action, any rich sense for the concrete facts and forces of life.

There is also no perverse attitude which clothes impurity in the

garb of virtue, or poses a soul-weariness in the service of callous

wantonness. Bitter earnestness, grim violence of darker passions,

or savage cynicism never mar the even tenor and serenity of these

artistic compositions which, with rare exceptions, smooth away

every scar and wrinkle which might have existed. It is not

that sorrow or suffering or sin is denied, but the belief in the

essential rationality of the world makes the poet idealistic in

his outlook and placidly content to accept the life around

himt while the purely artistic attitude makes him transcend the

merely personal. The Sanskrit poet is undoubtedly pessimistic

in his belief in the inexorable law of Karrnan and rebirth, but

his ttnliroited pessimism with regard to this world is toned down

ORIGINS AND CHARACTERISTICS 37

by his unlimited optimism with regard to the next. It fosters

in him a stoical resignation, an epicurean indifference and a

mystic hope and faith, which paralyse personal energy, suppress

the growth of external life and replace originality by submission.

On the other hand, this is exactly the atmosphere

which is conducive to idealised creation and serenity of

purely artistic accomplishment, in which Sanskrit poetry

excels.

This complacent attitude towards life falls in with the view

of Sanskrit Poetics which distinguishes the actual world from

the world of poetry, where the hard and harsh facts of life

dissolve themselves into an imaginative system of pleasing fictions.

It results in an impersonalised and ineffable aesthetic enjoyment,

from which every trace of its component or material is obliterated.

In other words, love or grief is no longer experienced as love or

grief in its disturbing poignancy, but as pure artistic sentiment

of blissful relish evoked by the idealised poetic creation. To

suggest this delectable condition of the mind, to which the name

of Rasa is given is regarded both by theory and practice to be

the aim of a work of art ; and it is seldom thought necessary

to mirror life by a direct portrayal of fact, incident or character.

It is for this reason that the delineation of sentiment becomes

important and even disproportionately important in poetry,

drama and romance ; and all the resources of poetic art and

imagination are brought to bear upon it. Only a secondary or

even nominal interest is attached to the story, theme; plot or

character, the unfolding of which is often made to wait till the

poet finishes his lavish sentimental descriptions or his refined

outpourings of sentimental verse and prose.

This over-emphasis on impersonalised poetic sentiment and

its idealised enjoyment tends to encourage grace, polish and

fastidious technical finish, in which fancy has the upper

hand of passion and ingenuity takes the place of feeling. Except

perhaps in a poet like Bhavabhuti, we come across very little of

rugged and forceful description, very little of naturalness and

simplicity, hardly any genuine emotional directness, nor any

love for all that is deep and poignant, as well as grand and

awe-inspiring, in life and nature. Even Kalidasa's description

of the Himalayas is more pleasing and picturesque than stately

and sublime. The tendency is more towards the ornate and the

refined than the grotesque and the robust, more towards harmonious

roundness than jagged angularity, more towards

achieving perfection of form than realising the integrity and

sincerity of primal sensations. It is, therefore, not surprising

that there is no real lyric on a large scale in Sanskrit ; that its

so-called dramas are mostly dramatic poems ; that its historical

writings achieve poetical distinction but are indifferent to mere

fact; that its prose romances sacrifice the interest of theme

to an exaggerated love of diction ; and that its prose in general

feels the effect of poetry.

Nevertheless, the Sanskrit poet is quite at home in the

depiction of manly and heroic virtues and the ordinary emotions

of life, even if they are presented in a refined domesticated form.

However self-satisfied he may appear, the poet has an undoubted

grip over the essential facts of life ; and this is best seen, not in

the studied and elaborate masterpieces of great poets, but in the

detached lyrical stanzas, in the terse gnomic verses of wordly

wisdom, in the simple prose tales and fables, and, above all, in

the ubiquitous delineation of the erotic feeling in its infinite

variety of moods and fancies. There is indeed a great deal of

what is conventional, and even artificial, in Sanskrit love-poetry ;

it speaks of love not in its simplicities but in its subtle moments.

What is more important to note is that it consists often of the

exaltation of love for love's sake, the amorous cult, not usually

of a particular woman, a Beatrice or a Laura, but of woman as

such, provided she is young and beautiful. But in spite of all

this, the poets display a perfect knowledge of this great human

emotion in its richness and variety and in its stimulating situations

of joy and sorrow, hope and fear, triumph and defeat. If

they speak of the ideal woman, the real woman is always before

ORIGINS AND CHARACTERISTICS 39

their eyes. The rhetorical commonplaces and psychological

refinements seldom obscure the reality of the sentiment ; and the

graceful little pictures of the turns and vagaries of love are often

remarkable for their fineness of conception, precision of touch

and delicacy of expression. The undoubted power of pathos

which the Sanskrit poet possesses very often invests these erotic

passages with a deeper and more poignant note ; and the poetical

expression of recollective tenderness in the presence of suffering,

such as we find in Kalidasa and Bhavabhuti, is unsurpassable for

its vividness of imagery and unmistakable tone of emotional

earnestness. But here again the general tendency is to elaborate

pathetic scenes in the theatrical sense, and to leave nothing to

the imagination of the reader. The theorists are indeed emphatic

that tlie sentiment should be suggested rather than expressed,

and never lend their authority to the fatal practice of wordy

exaggeration ; but this want of balance is perhaps due not

entirely to an ineffective love of parade and futile adorning of

trivialities, but also to an extreme seriousness of mind and

consequent want of humour, which never allow the poet to

attain the necessary sense of proportion and aloofness. There

is enough of wit in Sanskrit literature, and it is often

strikingly effective ; but there is little of the saving grace of

humour and sense of the ridiculous. Its attempts at both comic

and pathetic effects are, therefore, often unsuccessful ; and, as

we have said, it very seldom achieves comedy in its higher forms

or trngedy in its deeper sense.

But the seriousness, as well as the artificiality, of Sanskrit

literature is very often relieved by a wonderful feeling for

natural scenery, which is both intimate and real. In spite of

a great deal of magnificently decorative convention in painting,

there is very often the poet's freshness of observation, as well as

the direct recreative or reproductive touch. In the delineation

of human emotion, aspects of nature are very often skilfully

interwoven ; and most of the effective similes and metaphors of

Sanskrit love-poetry are drawn from the surrounding familiar

scenes. The J&tu-sarfihara, attributed to Kalidasa, reviews the six

Indian seasons in detail, and explains elegantly, if not with deep

feeiingf the meaning of the seasons for the lover. The same power

of utilizing nature as the background of human emotion is seen

in the Megha-diita, where the grief of the separated lovers is set

in the midst of splendid natural scenery. The tropical summer

and the rains play an important part in the emotional life of

the people. It is during the commencement of the monsoon

that the traveller returns home after long absence, and the expectant

wives look at the clouds in eagerness, lifting up the ends of

their curls in their hands; while the maiden, who in hot summer

distributes water to the thirsty traveller at the wayside resting

places, the Prapa-palika as she is called, naturally evokes a large

number of erotic verses, which are now scattered over the Anthologies.

Autumns also inspires beautiful sketches with its clear

blue sky, flocks of white flying geese and meadows ripe with

corn ; and spring finds a place with its smelling mango-blossoms,

southern breeze and swarm of humming bees. The groves

and gardens of nature form the background not only to these

little poems, and to the pretty little love-intrigues of the Sanskrit

plays, but also to the larger human drama played in the hermitage

of Kanva, to the passionate madness of Pururavas, to the

deep pathos of Rama's hopeless grief for Sita in the forest of

Dandaka, and to the fascinating love of Krsna and Radha on the

banks of the Yamuna.

It would appear that even if the Kavya literature was

magnificent in partial accomplishment, its development was

considerably hampered by the conditions under which it grew,

and the environment in which it flourished. If it has great

merits, its defects are equally great. It is easier, however,

to magnify the defects and forget the merits ; and it is often

difficult to realise the entire mentality of these poets in order

to appreciate their efforts in their proper light. The marvellous

results attained even within very great limitations show that

was surely nothing wrong with the genius of the poets,

ORIGINS AND CHARACTERISTICS '41

but something was wrong in the literary atmosphere, which*

cramped its progress and prevented the fullest enfranchisement

of the passion and the imagination. The absence of another

literature for comparison for the later Prakrit and allied

specimens are mainly derivative was also a serious drawback^

which would partially explain why its outlook is so limited and

the principles of poetic art and practice so stereotyped. India,

through ages, never stood in absolute isolation, and it could

assimilate and transmute what it received ; but Sanskrit

literature had very few opportunities of a real contact with any

other great literature. As in the drama, so in the romance

and other spheres, we cannot say that there is any reliable

ground to suppose that it received any real impetus from Greek

or other sources; and it is a pity that such an impetus never

came to give it new impulses and save it from stagnation.

It should also be remembered that the term Kavya is not

co-extensive with what is understood by the word poem or

poetry in modern times. It is clearly distinguished from the

'

epic/ to which Indian tradition applies the designation of

Itihasa; but the nomenclature '

court-epic

'

as a term of compromise

is misleading. The underlying conception, general

outlook, as well as the principles which moulded the Kavya are,

as we have seen, somewhat different and peculiar. Generally

speaking, the Kavya, with its implications and reticences, is

never simple and untutored in the sense in which these

terms can be applied to modern poetry; while sentimental

and romantic content, accompanied by perfection of form,

subtlety of expression and ingenious embellishment, is regarded,

more or less, as essential. The Sanskrit Kavya is wholly

dominated by a self-conscious idea of art and method; it

is not meant for undisciplined enjoyment, nor for the

satisfaction of causal interest. The rationale is furnished

by its super-normal or super-individual character, recognised

by poetic theory, which rules out personal passion and empha- l

sises purely artistic emotion. This is also obvious from the

6-184SB

fact that the bulk of this literature is in the metrical form.

But both theory and practice make the Kavya extensive enough

to comprehend in its scope any literary work of the imagination,

and refuse to recognise metre as essential. It, therefore, includes

poetry, drama, prose romance, folk-tale, didactic fable, historical

writing and philosophical verse, religious and gnomic stanza,

in fact, every branch of literature which may be contained

within the denomination of belles-lettres in the widest sense, to

the exclusion of whatever is purely technical or occasional. One

result of this attitude is that while the drama tends towards the

dramatic poem, the romance, tales and even historical or

biographical sketches are highly coloured by poetical and stylistic

effects. In construction, vocabulary and ornament, the prose

also becomes poetical. It is true that in refusing to admit that

the distinction between prose and poetry lies in an external fact,

namely the metre, there is a recognition of the true character of

poetic expression ; but in practice it considerably hampers the

development of prose as prose. It is seldom recognised that

verse and prose rhythms have entirely different values, and that

the melody and diction of the one are not always desirable in the

other. As the instruments of the two harmonies are not clearly

differentiated as means of literary expression, simple and

vigorous prose hardly ever develops in Sanskrit ; and its achievement

is poor in comparison with that of poetry, which almost

exclusively predominates and even approximates prose towards

itself.

Om Tat Sat
                                                        
(Continued...) 

(My humble salutations to Sreeman S N Dasgupta ji and Sreeman S K De ji for the collection)