[Music] hello everyone what is kavya swadupa or the ontology of kavya according to sanskrit the literary theoreticians this is a concept that we have briefly discussed before but i think it is important to elaborate on this concept since it forms the core of the inquiry initiated by sanskrit literary theory sanskrit kavi sastra always held an ontological view about literature that is to say it believed that it is the presence of certain special linguistic features such as poetic suggestion figures of speech figurative deviation etc that attribute literariness to a work of art therefore throughout its history of almost a millennium and a half sanskrit kavi shastra was exclusively preoccupied with the task of identifying and analyzing the formal devices generating literalness in a work of art considering caviar as a specialized mode of language marked by the ingenious use of certain distinctive or special linguistic devices kavi shastra always made it a point to deal with kavya from other uses of language such as shastra the vedas and workday language we have a host of literary theoreticians in sanskrit poetics who typify this exclusionist view of literature abhinav gupta in his commentary on ananda varthanas distinguishes the remit of kavya from that of the veda and workday language he says both everyday sentences and vedic sentences have meaning without being poems himachandra in kavya nishasana says that it is the presence of four components such as sabda or signifier artha or signification guna or poetic qualities and alankara or figures of speech that constitutes a kavia wakhpada delimits the ambit of kavya by defining it as a composition of shabda and artha marked by the absence of doshas and the presence of gunas and alankaras mamada observes that it is kavya the kaavya consists of word and sense without false and with merits and excellences of style which may at times be without figures of speech in chandralaka jaideva sets the limit of poetic expression by defining kavya as a verbal icon characterized by the absence of doshas and the presence of lakshana or deviant utterance ready dictionary style guna alankara rasa and virti vidyanatha in kavia prataparudriya a special composition of both gaddia or prose and padhya or poetry bereft of doshas and adorned by guna alankara shabda and artha patanayaga talks about three crucial components that are conspicuously absent in other uses of language and present only in kavia according to him these three elements include or denotative function or ability to realize aesthetic experience and bhagava kurtwa or the experience of aesthetic emotion in his commentary on dhaniyal apnava gupta reproduces the view of patan ayaka he says rather poetic words are often an altogether different nature from ordinary words thanks to their threefold operation their denotative power or apitayage operates within the limits of the literal meaning their aesthetic efficacy or pavakatwa operates in the area of rasa etc that is it transforms the vithavas etc indores and their efficacy of aesthetic enjoyment phagoa operates within the sensitive audience the working of a poem consists of these three operations so bhattanayaka further distinguishes kavya from shastra and historical narratives he says one may distinguish the shastras by the prominence they give to the word one knows that stories are wedded to meaning one forms a just notion of a poem by subordinating these two that is word and meaning and making the operation or vyapara paramount that it is figurative deviation of speech or vacrakti that makes a kavya different from the ordinary expression and shastras according to bhaja although poetry is generally called the combination of word and meaning not all combinations of word and meaning can claim the status of a kavia in sringara very clearly distinguishes between kavya and other linguistic genres on the basis of the nature of language employed in them according to poja while worthy language is the explicit language of science and daily life kavya is the deviant language found in the text teeming with aesthetic pleasure in sarasota parana poja in fact illustrates the process in which a non-descript expression is made poetic and laden with rasa through the figurative deviation of speech paja says in the expression hey maiden why don't you laugh me who loves you a lot we have an ordinary expression that produces only boredom because it lacks rasa or aesthetic emotion in the god of love that cruel person is pitiless to me but he holds no grudge to you my pretty eyedlast the sense is sophisticated and generates resa the factors that are instrumental for the creation of rasa are the most important distinguishing mark of kavya are these a novel idea non-ordinary mellifluous expression beautiful composition clarity in articulation and meaning that conforms to propriety uh in shungara prakasha poja lists 12 rules governing the combination of signifier or shabda and signification or in the production of poetic language of these 12 principles while the first eight ones are common to many other forms of language the last four ones are unique to the linguistic body of kavia alone and these four characteristics that poja exclusively reserves for kavia include the presence of poetic qualities figures of speech aesthetic emotion and the absence of poetic force we can see this exclusionist view of kavia as a special linguistic category with complex literary conventions and elaborate uh metrical schemes unchangingly uh going down the line till the end of the active phase of sanskrit the literary culture with jagannatha uh in the 17th century observing that kavya is signifies generating noble significations according to nero the problem of kavi sastra was then seen in differentiating that particular expression we call poetic from other verbal means shastra and narrative and throughout its history of almost a millennium and a half kavi shastra never ever strayed away from this central problem in other words kavi sastra was incessantly preoccupied with the crucial task of pinpointing factors that were responsible for the specificity of poetic language polocopsis what substantively constitutes kavia and how literariness comes into being were naturally matters of ongoing debate and various elements were proposed as the essence of kavia but the fact that kavia has an essence a cell for soul as it was phrased something marking it as different from every other language use was never doubted by anyone so this identification and scrutiny of formal factors that made kavia a special use of language was primarily motivated by the hope that an inquiry into the textual elements responsible for the unique nature of kavya will contribute greatly to the creation of good art in their endeavor to identify the soul or the most important constituent of kaabia different literary theoreticians or alan karikas privileged different formal elements as the inalienable mark of literature samudra bandha a 10th century commendator on ruyagas alankara sarvaswa gives us a glimpse into this in his commentary on alankara sarvaswa samudravantha observes literature is marked by certain special words and meaning the speciality of these two that is shabda and artha can be analyzed in three ways through some language feature or dharma or through some function vyapara or through aesthetic suggestion or twani the first group contains two sects the one that gives importance to figures of speech and the one that lays emphasis on poetic qualities in the second sect some pay attention to beautiful expression and the others to the capacity to produce or generate aesthetic pleasure in readers especially of these five groups the last one is accepted by uthada and others the second one is accepted by vamana the third one by the author of the fourth by patan ayaga and the fifth by anandavarthana although there were differences of opinion among literary theoreticians as to which of these elements has to be treated as the most important or the vital element of kavia they all had a consensus of opinion on the notion that kavia is definitely a unique use of language therefore their efforts were unidirectionally oriented towards unraveling the various formal factors that attribute an aura of uniqueness to literature the term alamkar sastra which was often used synonymously with sanskrit poetics readily functioned as a pointer to the teleology of sanskrit kavi sastra because of kavi shastra's unwavering interest in the ornaments or alankara of kavia that made literature a higher order linguistic entity or composition the term alamkara sastra was often used synonymously with kavi a survey of the major theoretical positions in sanskrit literary theories such as guna vacrakti twini and aojitya will further corroborate this observation for paramaha the earliest known exponent of kavi sastra it is primarily alankaras or figures of speech that transform a piece of writing into kavia therefore in his kavya lankara tamaha is primarily or chiefly concerned with the identification and analysis of alankaras that beautify a work of literature tamaha lists and analyzes around 38 talankaras in his attempt to identify the unique nature of kavya sharida or the bodhi of kaavya according to paamaha what makes an alankara different from other uses of language is its figurative deviation of speech or vacraka from ordinary language therefore he employs the term alankara to refer to all the deviant linguistic expressions parma obtains that a poet should always be diligent in developing this art of figurative deviation which functions as the vital force of allah alankaras he knows this peculiar method of statement or vacrakti is found everywhere that is in other alankaras by this meanings are rendered beautiful parts should be assiduous in cultivating it where is an alankara without this in the fifth chapter of kavya angara tamaha points out that a composition devoid of figurative deviation of sense such as the sun has set the moon shines or the birds fly back to their nest is a mere report or varta not kavya but pamaha's theory of alankara shows is that kavia is distinct from other uses of language by the presence of alankaras so his analysis of kavi shadhira is mainly oriented towards the identification and scrutiny of alankaras which present everything in a defamiliarized form dandin in his kavya darsha declares that the aim of his work is to identify the elements that make up the bodhi of kavya here that is in kavyadarsha i state the characteristic marks of kavya or kavya lakshana after my careful study and scrutiny of the previous treatises in kavya darshad and in broadens the scope of his scrutiny of kavi sharira by increasing the number of figures of speech to around 35 and that of poetic merits to 10. considering the amount of attention that he pays to the analysis of alankara and guna we can safely assume that dundin's conception dandin's conception kavi sharida is primarily constituted by gunas and alankaras or figures of speech vamanas kavya lankara sutra opens with a chapter titled kavya shadeery nurnaya or the understanding of the anatomy of kavia such a self-explanatory title immediately informs us that the purpose of his work is to identify and analyze the formal factors that go into the making of the body of kavya vamana sees a guna or poetic merit as the vital force of literature according to him a verbal expression without guna cannot become a cavea just as a group of words without syntax cannot make a coherent meaning he is of the view that a literary style or ready where all the gunas are properly knit together serves us the soul of kavia though vamana opines that the body of kavya is characterized by sound and sense decorated by gunas and alankaras he privileges gunasawa alankaras according to him it is gunas such as saujas and prasada that are responsible for the unique nature of kavya the function of alankara on the other hand is only to enhance the beauty of kavya which is already decorated or beautified by the presence of gunas though there is a shift of focus in vamana's theory from alankara to guna the idea that kavya is a supra normal entity remains unchanged ananda vartana the successor of vamana criticizes vamana's view that is the soul of kavia according to ananda it was persons unable to analyze the true nature of poetry who propounded the doctrine of styles for ananda thani or poetic suggestion is the soul of kaavya therefore in his dhonia laga anandavarthana examines the nature of stony in detail he states that the purpose of his critical enquiry in the following manner he says here some might content that poetry is nothing more than what is embodied in word and meaning the means of beautifying despair that lies in sound such as alliteration and those that lie in meaning such as simile are well known also well known are those qualities such as sweetness which possess certain propriet properties of phoneme and arrangement the virti which have been described by some writers under such names as and which are not different in function from these figures of these figures and qualities also have reached our ears so also the styles of readings such as vaidharpi what is this thing called 20 that it should differ from these according to anandavarthana is the linguistic device by which a sign or a set of signs uh expresses something other than what it apparently signifies ananda says the type of poetry which the wise called dhwani is that in which sense or word subordinating their own meaning suggests that suggested meaning according to this theory what primarily distinguishes kavya from other uses of language is absolutely the presence of dhani this does not mean that ananda vartana turns a blind eye to the linguistic devices such as alankara and guna that his predecessors had previously identified as the distinguishing mark of kavia according to aranda varathana alankaras function like ornaments on a person's body while gunas are like qualities like courage however the soul of kavya for him is undoubtedly 20 or poetic suggestion 10th century sanskrit literary critic considers the figurative deviation of speech as the chief source of literalness according to kundaka kavya is that combination of shabda or signifier undertha or signified which shines forth with uh bhakra or figurative deviation of speech to impart pleasure to the readers according to him bhakaraki signifies that kind of beautiful signification or abhita which is different from common usage gundaga says that these two that is shabda and artha are the things to be ornamented the only ornament that beautifies them is vacroti and vacrakti issues from a poet's expertise in using language beautifully he divides vacrada into five important categories such as varna vinyasa or figurative deviation of phonemes consonants and syllables or figurative deviation of speech to transcend the literal meaning of a word or figurative deviation of the terminal part of a word or the figurative deviation of sentence or figurative deviation of episodes and finally prabhantavakradha or figurative deviation of plot considering vacrafti as the supreme governing principle of kaavya kundaga makes a very thorough analysis of the various forms of vacrakti in the four chapters of his vaccida so shaymindra an 11th century literary critic from kashmir holds that aojita or propriety is the hallmark of kavya shadida unlike the literary theoreticians we have seen before shemendra does not introduce any new formal features as the source of literalness on the other hand he lays emphasis on the proper organization of the linguistic devices which are already considered the hallmark of literature or kavia he is of the view that in cavea the proper organization of these distinct linguistic devices is as important as their presence according to shaymandra neither figures of speech nor poetic merits will look charming without propriety srimendra's idea or concept of aojitiya is an all-encompassing precept that is applied to all aspects of kavia so emphasizing the importance of propriety in kavya shemendra says figures of speech are but ornaments while merits of speech are mere excellences but propriety is the abiding life of poetry full of flavor srimendra compares a poem that does not conform to the rules of propriety to a totally unruly person wearing his griddle string around his neck necklace around his waist anklets on the hands and bracelets on the feet by prescribing rules regarding the ontology of cavia such as how figures of speech should be organized how characters should be represented on stage or in literature or how different sentiments should be expressed or portrayed austin delimits the ambit of kavia from the non-descript use of language in short by laying out rules regarding the composition of literature srimendra adhered to the view that literature is a special way of using language and literalness is clearly a textual entity emanating from the writer's sense of decorum or propriety or augitia concerning the organization of various formal elements so from this analysis we can arrive at two major points that are central to this uh study of kavi shastra first of all the entire epistemology of kavi shastra had a consensus of opinion on the idea that kavia is a special way of using language and secondly the chief concern of kavi shastra was the identification and scrutiny of different linguistic elements responsible for the unique nature of kavia it is significant to note that sanskrit kavi sastra in its canonical form is very much similar to russian formalism in the western critical praxis formalism like sanskrit the literary science sees literature as a special mode of language which is distinctly different from ordinary language uh according to terry eagleton the formalist so literary language as a special kind of language in contrast to the ordinary language we are familiar with or we commonly use for formalis the central function of ordinary language is to communicate to auditors a message or information by reference to the world existing outside of language the linguistics of literature differs from the linguistics of practical discourse or common language because its laws are oriented towards the production or oriented towards producing the distinctive features that formal is called literenas mukarovisky in his standard language and poetic language says that poetic language unlike the ordinary language of everyday life foregrounds its unique nature by pushing communication into the background and inviting the readers or the spectators attention to its own unique form this conception of literature as a special mode of language endorsed by mukarra whiskey typifies the view of all formalist critics about literature so the primary uh function of these special formal devices according to victor shkrovsky is to defamiliarize or estrange literary language from ordinary use of language assuming that a literary work has a non-ordinary analogy characterized by the presence of literariness the formalist critics were preoccupied with the task of identifying and analyzing the special formal devices generating or creating literalness in a work of art or literature in the lines uh cited by eikenbern roman jakobson observes the object of study in literature is not literature but literalness that is what makes a given work a literary work uh what we should specifically note here is that about the formalist theoretical position in the west and sanskrit kavi shastra or literary tradition in the east hold an exclusionist view of literature which proposes that only certain uses of language characterized by a special treatment can qualify to become literature so these are the major points that we have discussed i'll just quickly review all the major points that we have discussed so far the first point was that kavya is distinctly different from the ordinary form of speech the second point was that considering kavia as a special mode of language this literary theoretician started understanding kavi sharira they started identifying the special formal features making a piece of writing kavia and finally we have seen that there is a lot of similarity between formalism and sanskrit kavi sastra so depending upon the question of what makes a piece of writing kavia sanskrit the literary theoreticians in fact came up with various formal features such as thani alankara guna vakrokhti poetic suggestion etc so the point we need to necessarily remember here is that despite all these differences of opinion as to what formal element they should consider as the soul of literature all these theoretical all these literary theoreticians firmly believed that kavia is a distinct entity i hope you have understood these lessons thank you [Music] you