AUCITYA

 

AUCITYA

INTRODUCTION

The term ‘Aucitya’ and the emphasis upon it as the life of poetry is of comparatively recent origin, the principle of Aucitya (appropriateness) had been implicitly reckoned with from the time of the earliest writers on the theory of poetry in Sanskrit. Bharata recognized the expedience of the principle in connection with rasa. Bhamaha, Dandin and Rudrata admitted it in their conception of gunas and dosas. However, the slinging out of aucitya as a factor responsible for poetic beauty, and the exposition of its relevance in all constituents of poetry was first accomplished in Dhvanyaloka. Kuntak too attached due importance to the concept. Ultimately it was Ksemendra who attempted to raise aucitya to the position of the ‘life’ of poetry, and to give a comprehensive exposition of it in all detail in his valuable treatise.

THE TERM AUCITYA

As described by Ksemendra the greatest exponent of this theory

Uchitasyabhavah tadaucityam pracaksyate

(i.e. the sense of aptness is known as aucitya)

When one thing befits another, or when the things suit each other well and match perfectly, they may be said to be proper or appropriate. Such matching and fitting quality is aucitya. To clarify this further, when the different components of a composition are appropriate to the context, when they match and balance harmoniously to achieve the purpose of the poet, the quality is named aucitya.

Anandvardhan gives a comprehensive exposition of the principle of aucitya with a clear understanding of its function in poetry. He implies that aucitya has to be adhered to at every step in all poetry of any worth. According to the theory of Dhvani, the ideal kavya is that in which rasa is manifested through dhvani i.e. rasadhvani. Hence the supreme goal in any poetic composition is manifestation of rasa. Anandvardhan relates aucitya primarily to rasa.

AUCITYA AND RASA:

The indispensability of aucitya for proper evocation of rasa is emphatically stated as follows:

 

Anaucityadrate nanyad

Rasabhangasya karanam

Prasiddhaucitya bandhastu

Rasasvopanisat para

(i.e. Other than impropriety there is no cause that contributes to the breach of rasa. The prime secret of rasa manifestation is conformity to well known tenets of propriety rasa.)

Thus, aucitya is regarded as an intrinsic element of rasa, and consequently in poetry. With regard to rasa aucitya has two aspects. On one hand, it is the condition of appropriateness of the subordinate and rasa manifesting elements to the dominant rasa, and again it is their harmony and proper mutual relationship among themselves so that they promote the evocation of rasa.

Aucitya in respect of nature of characters (alambanvibhava) will determine the selection of the sthayibhava to be nourished in the context. Characters in literature are divided into three grades on the basis of their social standing as

·         Noble

·         Middling

·         Lowly

Anandvardhan emphasizes the need for aucitya in this respect too when emotions come to be represented in literature. The emotion of love is certainly common to all these grades. But, how that emotion is portrayed, ought to differ in each case. If love in a noble character is depicted in the way a lowly character would behave in under similar circumstances, it would lead to nothing but derision. Thus in the depiction of all sentiments, propriety in relation to character concerned has to be born in mind.

In the subject of samghatana (verbal collocation) too Anandvardhana emphasizes the need of propriety. Samghatans are dependent upon gunas and evoke rasa. The factor that governs the selection of Samghatana is said to be the property of the speaker and the spoken, as well as of the literary form employed. That is to say, the criterion for determining whether the poet should use an elaborate style with hardly any compounds, is propriety in respect of the characters involved, of the subject matter conveyed and of the literary medium adopted.

Similarly according to Anandvardhana propriety should prevail in other factors suggestive of rasa such as guna and riti. The idea is summed up in Dhvanyaloka as follows,

“The main task of a master poet is to employ all expressed and expressive elements with due propriety towards rasa .”

 

 

KUNTAK’S VIEWS

The next theorist of note to dwell upon the importance of aucitya was Kuntaka. In his opinion, aucitya is an indispensable attribute of all poetry. For, he considers aucitya as a guna which is common to all poetry. Kuntaka deals with two sets of gunas.

The first is constituted of variable gunas which vary with each marga and which thereby form the distinguishing features of the different margas.

The second set comprising of two gunas, namely aucitya and saubhagya, remains constant and should be found in each and every marga. Thus aucitya amounts to an essential feature in all types of poetry.

KSEMENDRA AND AUCITYA

The student advocate of aucitya theory was Ksemendra, a later contemporary and pupil of Abhinavgupta. He was a prolific writer- a poet and a critic- and one of his works that is  Aucityavicarcarca was written in order to expound his theory of aucitya. In his opinion, the soul of poetry was neither rasa, nor dhvani nor any other factor laid down by the earlier theorists. He declared aucitya to be the soul of poetry,

Aucityam rasasiddhasya

Sthiram kavyasyajivitam

(i.e. Appropriateness is the abiding life of poetry that is endowed with rasa.)

Ksemendra is vehement in declaring the indispensability of aucitya in poetry. All components of kavya perform their function only when they are employed with due reference to appropriateness.

Ksemendra questions,

“Of what use are alamkaras or gunas in the absence of aucitya?”

Alamkaras are mere ornaments and gunas are formal excellences , what imparts life to them is aucitya. They deserve to be called alamkaras and gunas if only properly placed. Without aucitya a guna even becomes a positive defect. Ksemendra makes all such components subordinate to aucitya.

In accordance with the view of Anandvardhana  and Abhinavgupta, Ksemendra equates alamkaraas to eternal ornaments like necklaces and bangles  decorating the body and gunas to inherent human qualities like bravery or compassion.

The entire text of Aucityavicarcarca from karika eleven onwards is detailed treatment of each of those aspects of aucitya. This study is of an empirical nature. Ksemendra explains why the particular feature in the given verse is proper or otherwise. In this analysis Ksemendra does not hesitate to criticize the verses of eminent writers and very often finds fault even with his own verses. These comments show his high sense of aesthetic judgment.

According to him, there are 28 kinds of aucitya and four main kinds of aucitya, which are

·         Bhashasaili aucitya

·         Racanavidhana aucitya

·         Visay aucitya

·         Kalpana aucitya

Ksemendra deals with the appropriateness of poetic idea in relation to poetic beauty. Whatever ideas the poet conceives through his genius in the general import of the whole work, a poet is at liberty to make certain changes in  original story to make it more appealing and such changes serve their purpose only when they are introduced appropriately.

Ksemendra deals with the subject of aucitya of rasa at considerable length, and that forms his major subject of discussion. He declares aucitya to be the very life of rasa, which in turn is implicitly admitted to be the invariable requisite in poetry.

Rasa can not be conveyed by words that merely express the emotional state, and therefore the frequent use of interjection ‘ha’ ,’ha’ (alas alas) would convey no karuna rasa. A poetic figure alamkara can hinder the realization of rasa, if improperly used while its proper usage would certainly be advantageous.

 

 

CONCLUSION:

 

 

The discovery and recognition of the principle of aucitya can be reckoned as significant advance of aesthetic thought in Sanskrit. In the absence of aucitya, no literature would achieve its purpose. Anything that runs contrary to the development of the main theme would be inappropriate. The concepts of rasa, concepts of Dhvani and aucitya are the three main stages of Sanskrit literary criticism. They form the Sanskrit theorists’ valuable contribution to the aesthetic theories of all times, and reflect the most advanced stage of their theoretical thought.