Issue 15, Sep-Oct 2007 Back | Next | Home | Logout Editorial Forthcoming Issues Focus: Indian Aesthetics Feature:

Challenge of Translation Regular Sections Logout Mail to a friend Patnaik Tandra

Tandra Patnaik: The Logic of Emotion

"Naciketa"; Oil Painting by Priyadarshi Patnaik

Saying and Showing: A Mapping of the Language of Poetics Language not only says it also shows; it has the potency of transcending the barrier of what is stated and transport one to a state of realizing the meaning of what is not stated but remains unstated. This thesis forms the very basis of an aesthetic theory of two great minds of India nandavardhana (A D 860) and Abhinavagupta (A D 980). They turned attention to a different dimension of meaning that can play a key role in the expression of poetic emotion. I intend to offer an overview of this unparalleled theory that had its roots in the Vedic view of language that was further explored by Bhartrhari, the Grammarianphilosopher. The Indian aestheticians of the Classical age paid a lot of attention to the issue of what should be the relation between language and the expression of poetic emotion. On this issue one may largely come across three fundamental views. The first category of thinkers believed in the use of words for the embellishment of the poetic sense. Here the concentration is on the external beauty of the body of the poetry that can be achieved by the use the imaginative and skillful concatenation words. The second strand of aesthetic theory highlighted on the poets power of creativity expressed through the use of striking and novel expressions. Both the views largely depend on what can be said by language. But the third way of handling the issue of poetic expression concentrates not on what can be said but on what can be shown by the use of words and the resultant poetic emotion that can be enjoyed by a sensitive reader. This third theory adds a novel dimension to the understanding of language that has very few parallel in the aesthetic and the philosophical tradition of India. nandavardhana very critically and analytically explored this dimension of language and Abhinavagupta added further depth to this theory. Both of them paid equal importance to the genius of the poet in

showing the suggested sense (vyanjan) and the sensitive readers capability to grasp the power of the suggestion of words and the aesthetic pleasure (rasa) found in the poetic expression. What makes them special is their deep commitment to the theory they believed in. This is clearly indicated by the attempt they made to quell the criticism that the aestheticians generally faced from the philosophers and logicians for their subjective and non-formal understanding of language. No aesthetician so boldly stepped in to the field of the logic of language to clearly delineate the validity and sanctity of the language of poetics as was done by these two thinkers. No aesthetician so clearly focused on the functional and structural basis of language when it comes to the expression of poetic emotion. Before I undertake the problem of the poetic expression of meaning as enunciated by nandavardhana and Abhinavagupta let us have a brief acquaintance with the standard philosophical position on the issue. According to the philosophers of language there can be broadly two categories of powers or functions of meaning lexical/ conventional meaning (abhidh) and indicative meaning (laksan) that mostly stands for the metaphorical meaning. We all know that the vocabulary we use is limited but the sense that we can express through words can be unlimited. To sort out this problem the philosophers have recognized, apart from the lexical meaning, the indicative or metaphorical meaning as a valid mode of the expression of the wordmeaning. It is most often argued that these two well-recognised modes are enough to handle different dimensions of meaning. However, it was the later Niyayikas who offered sanctity to another function of meaning to accommodate contextual meaning that could arise not just out of isolated word-meanings but in the context of a sentence. This was known as tatparya vrtti. Abhinava admits the role of these three functions of meaning but adds suggestivity or dhvani as the fourth power/function of

meaning (caturthym tu kaksy dhvananavyprah, Locana, under Vrtti I.4). He argues, Therefore this is the fourth function distinct from the three, abhidh, ttparya and laksan. It is understood from the designations of such and other terms; dhvanana, dyotana, vyanjana, pratyayna, avagamana. (Locana). According nandavardhana the suggestive function of dhvani and vyanjan cannot be fulfilled by either abhidh or laksan. Therefore he discards the argument of the Mimmsakas that abhidh can convey the suggested sense. He also dismissed the claim that the suggested meaning can be equated with the metaphorical meaning. Such metaphorical expressions as The boy is lion or the village on the Ganges, etc., fails to suggest the poetic sense. Poetry, according to nanda, must mean more than it says. And if what it shows is more attractive or more beautiful than the expressed sense then it constitutes a better variety of poetry. In verse 13 of Uddyota I. (Dhvanyloka) Ananda defines dhvani and argues in the vrtti that the suggested sense must be dominant over the expressed sense (vacyartha) in order that the piece of composition is the proper locus of dhvani. Thus nandavardhana defines the term dhvani as follows: That kind of poetry wherein either the (conventional) meaning or the (conventional) word renders itself or its meaning secondary (respectively) and suggests the implied is designated by the learned a dhvani or suggestive poetry. (I.13.) Elaborating it further he says, Just as the sounds of utterance reveal the integral meaning (sphota) over and above the meaning expressed by the individual words, so also a good poem with its sounds, as well as literal sense, reveal over and above the expressed meaning , a charming sense which has great aesthetic value. This is called dhvani, and this is the soul of poetry.( I.2) According to him in poetry meaning is basically expressed in two modes; literal (vacyrtha) and implied (pratiymana). The latter type of meaning is something over and above the component word-meanings. We

need literal meaning to express the conventional meaning but the suggested meaning is over above the meaning directly stated. Elaborating the idea further he says that pratiyamn-artha is something like the charm of a girl which is over and above the beauty of the various parts of the body. Thus the intended/suggested meaning is something more than the literal meaning of the words, and depends on the whole poem and not merely on its parts (I.4). In this form of poetry the words and their literal meanings occupy a subordinate position and suggest a charming sense. Thus the dhvani theory is based on three postulates (a) dhvani has a distinct status quite different from the primary meaning (abhidha), (b) dvani is intrinsic to poetry, (c) dhvani cannot be explained either in terms of primary meaning or secondary meaning. However, every suggestive function of meaning is not dhvani. Along with the suggested sense what is needed is that it must evoke a sense of beauty in the heart of the reader. A close look at both, Dhvanyloka and Locana reveals that for both nandavardhana and Abhinavagupta dhvani is centered on beauty, not on the mere suggestion. The emphasis is on the feeling of a sense of beauty (carupratiti). Abhinava renames this state of feeling as poetic or aesthetic repose (visrntisthna). Abhinava clarifies that by suggestive power or vyanjan, nandavardhana means that function of words that can offer the reader the aesthetic repose (rasa). This is what distinguishes poetic suggestion from metaphor. We must note that for nandavardhana as well as Abhinavaguta dhvani is closely connected with the feeling of aesthetic pleasure (rasa) by the reader. Though nanda does not provide any theory of rasa in his treatise, he makes it explicit that the whole point of his work is not so much to show the existence of dhvani but to establish the importance of the suggestion of rasa.

This is the reason why he holds that out of the three categories of dhvani, i.e., Vstudhvani, Alamkradhvani and Rasadhvani, the last one is really expressive of the highest poetic emotion. However, Abhinava pays special attention to the theory of rasa and believes that the true category poetry has the capacity to enter the heart of the reader (hrdayanupravesa) that a poet achieves through right type of suggestive mode. In such use the stated meaning is capable of leading to the unstated meaning. Here the words do not say but show. From our very brief discussion about nanda and Abhinavas very bold and radical views about the power and potentiality of the words it may appear quite strange that in the backdrop of aesthetic theories that most often claim to stick to the tradition, how these two thinkers could come out with something so revolutionary? To answer this question we have to look a little deep into the Indian tradition of looking at the problem of meaning. From its very inception the Indian intellectual tradition has recognized the immense potentiality of the principle of language. nandavardhana is not the first thinker to bring into limelight the suggestive function of language. Some verses of the Rg Veda clearly hint at this function of language. Let me refer to two such verses to validate my point. In the Rg Veda it is stated that: Many who see do not see language. Many who hear do not listen to it. It (language) reveals itself like a loving and well-adorned wife to her husband (to those who understands the true nuances of language). (X.71.4) In this poignant verse a clear distinction is introduced between those who have the ability to understand the meaning stated and those who have the sensitivity to grasp the inner significance of the words unstated. It is with reference to the second category of meaning that it is stated it reveals itself like

a loving and well-adorned wife to her husband. Another important passage from Rg Veda states (I.164.45): Four are the definite grades of speech. The learned and wise know them. Three of them are deposited in secret. They indicate no meaning to common man. Men speak the fourth grade of speech Which is phonetically expressed. In this verse it is clearly indicated that stated or expressed meaning constitutes only the superficial level of meaning. The phonetic and conventional meaning is like the tip of the ice-berg. The unstated meaning is potentially more profound than the stated meaning and it can only be grasped by the wise. However, the later philosophical systems, in their quest for the structural neatness of language, paid scanty attention to this inner level of meaning. nandavardhana is one of the first thinkers to work out a detailed analysis of the power of the unstated inner meaning. At the same time it must be admitted that the cryptic verses could not have provided enough justification for Ananda to provide logic of the poetic meaning without a theoretical mapping that fortunately for him was provided by the Grammarian philosopher Bhartrhari. In the Krik I.13 of Dhvanyloka he admits that idea of dhvani and vyanjan were rooted in this Grammarians theory of language. A little probe shows that he might have been influenced by Bhartrhari in three possible ways; first, Bhartrharis use of the term dhvani as the manifestor or suggestor of meaning; second, his theory of sphota as the ultimate unity of meaning; and finally his theory of meaning-holism that holds that meaning is never communicated by the isolated words, but a sentence, a passage or may be the whole poem or book. The most important theoretical support for nandavardhana and Abhinavagupta comes from this aspect of his theory better known

as akandapaksavda (linguistic holism). While most of the philosophers believed that meaning is rendered by the concatenation of isolated and individual words (khandapaksa), this grammarian-philosopher preferred to part ways with the philosophers of language and claimed that the whole alone is real, not the parts. So, meaning finally depends on what is conveyed by the sentence or a series of a sentence as a whole. This is one of the reasons why Bhartrhari dismissed such artificial distinctions of word-meaning as abhidh and laksan. In other words, he claimed that there is no one- to -one relation between the word and the meaning. Thus, the sense communicated by the whole can transcend the boundaries of what the word says. Keeping this linguistic theory as the structural basis of poetics nandavardhana and Abhinavagupta argued that as the spoken words suggest the meaning and eventually evoke a unified meaning (sphota), similarly, the use of words in poetry suggest an inner meaning and evoke a poetic mood in the reader. Besides, this poetic mood suggested is not just a concatenation of word-meanings but a total poetic meaning flowing either from a passage or a whole poem. This is clear from nandavardhanas remark that the beauty of the poetic expression is something like the charm of a girl which is over and above the beauty of the various parts of the body. Thus the intended/suggested meaning is something more than the literal meaning of the words, and depends on the whole poem, and not merely on its parts. Moreover the use of words in poetry suggest an unified inner meaning that does not depend on what the words say but what they finally show. References Abhinavagupta. Locana. Bombay: Kavya Mala Series, 1891. Anandavardhana. Dhvanyaloka. Trans. K. Krishnamoorthy. Dharwar: Karnataka University, 1974.

Chari, V. K. Sanskrit Criticism. New Delhi: Motilal Banarassidass, 1993. Coward, Harold. The Sphoto Theory of Language. Delhi: Motilal Banarassidass, 1980. Matilal, B. K. The Word and the World. Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1990.

Top