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...)
(Continued...)
(My humble salutations to Sreeman S N Dasgupta ji and Sreeman S K
De ji for the collection)
0 comments:
Post a Comment