DHVANI THEORY

 

INTRODUCTION
Ṛājāṇākā Āṇāṇḍvāṛḍḥāṇā was a reputed Kashmirian poet, rhetorician and philosopher.  He was patronized by king Avantivaram of Kashmir. Kalhana, the celebrated author of Rastarangini the most authoritative chronicle of Kashmir mentions him as one of the ornaments adoring the court of king Avantivarman. Āṇāṇḍvāṛḍḥāṇā is the author of the works, both literary and philosophical. His theory of ḍḥvāṇī  which came into limelight in the 9^th century A.D. dominated Indian poetics from the 9^th to 12^th century A.D.

GENESIS OF THE THEORY OF ḌḤVĀṆĪ

Āṇāṇḍvāṛḍḥāṇā’s theory of ḍḥvāṇī changed Indian poetics in its essence. Aestheticians of poetry were compelled to revive their notions about the older concepts like Āḷāṃkāṛās, gūṇā, ṛīṭī etc. in the light of the theory of ḍḥvāṇī. Āṇāṇḍvāṛḍḥāṇāa made a great discovery by stating that every part of speech and small factors like case endings and particles can at the touch of imagination be enriched in meaning. Āṇāṇḍvāṛḍḥāṇā and his followers clearly mention that they have derived inspiration for “Ḍḥvāṇyāḷokā’ from the Sphotvad of the grammarians. Therefore it is worthwhile to examine Sphotvad of the vāīyākārāṇī and their concept of ṣpḥoṭā and ḍḥvāṇī   Āṇāṇḍvāṛḍḥāṇā in his ‘Ḍḥvāṇyāḷokā’ hails the Vaiyakaranis with great respect. He says,

“The expression is designated by the learned, the foremost among the learned are grammarians because grammar lies at the root of all studies.”

WHAT IS ḌḤVĀṆĪ

The word ḍḥvāṇī in ordinary parlance means ‘sound’ or ‘tone’.  In language sound carries meaning. A word in its basic grammatical sense is a combination of letters. The Sanskrit grammarians argue that the letters are not the ultimate cause of meaning.They assert that a simple arrangement of words can not lead to a sense for various reasons.

•       Firstly, the meaning is signified by the word as a whole and not by individual letters.

•       Secondly mere combination of letters also fails to produce meaning.

The reason being letters are not uttered simultaneously and they disappear as soon as they are uttered. Nullifying the belief that letters in their combination signify the meaning of a word, the Sanskrit grammarians discovered a distinct entity called sphota. They argue that meaning is also signified by the sound which becomes the meaning of the word. The sound manifest ‘an external and imperceptible element’ (sphota) which really conveys the idea that strikes the mind of the listeners. The sound that manifest sphota are termed ‘ḍḥvāṇī ’.

THE CENTRAL THESIS OF THE THEORY OF ḌḤVĀṆĪ

The central thesis of the theory of ḍḥvāṇī  is that words in their capacity of conveying sense, possess a threefold function, and consequently express a three fold sense.

The three functions are known as

•       Ābḥīḍḥā (denotation)

•       Ḷākṣḥāṇā (indication)

•       Vyāṇājāṇā(Suggestion)

And the three senses conveyed are

•       Ābḥīḍḥeyā  (denoted, primary)

•       Ḷākṣy (indicated)

•       Vyāṇgyā (suggested)

Respectively 

       Similarly three kinds of words that give rise to them are termed

•       Vācāk (Denotative)

•       Ḷākṣḥāṇīkā (Indicative)

•       Vyāṇjṇīkā(suggestive)

The primary meaning of word is that which is ascribed to it by convention through the accepted usage of the world. In a given context it is the meaning directly conveyed to the listener. The word “Cow” denotes the sense of a particular domestic animal familiar to the listener. It is also the dictionary meaning of the particular word.

The power or the function which operates to convey this meaning is ābḥīḍḥā. The type of words that     convey such conventional meaning is called vācāk (denotative). Denotative word is that which conveys a direct conventional meaning.

The indicated (Ḷākṣy) is an extended meaning derivable from a word under certain condition. This kind of meaning arises only when the primary sense of a particular word is inapplicable and inoperative. Under such circumstances a second sense connected with the primary sense arises due to popular usage or  a special purpose. For example, the expression,

‘the hamlet on the river Ganges’

The primary sense of the phrase ‘on the river Ganges’ is inoperative and the indicated sense ‘on the bank of the river. The function of words that conveys this secondary meaning is called indication (Ḷākṣḥāṇā)

The suggested sense is that which is obtainable from a word over and beyond its denoted or indicated senses and in addition to them. The function of suggestion operates when the other two functions- denotation and connotation are inapplicable. Ḍḥvāṇī  is that where the literal meaning is suppressed, that is, the literal meaning is not intended by the speaker and also it makes no sense in the context. For example:

Ṣūvāṛṇpūṣḥpām pṛūṭḥāvīṃ ćḥīṇvāṇāṇṭīṇ pūṛūṣḥāyāḥ

Ṣūṛāṣyā kṛūṭvīggḥyāṣyā yāṣyā jāṇāṭī ṣevīṭūṃ

“Three persons will gather flowers of gold from the earth. The bold, the learned, and he who knows how to serve.”

In the above example, the literal meaning is that the three kinds of persons get the gold flowers out of the earth. This is obviously impossible because earth cannot yield flowers of gold. Therefore, this example cannot be understood through the primary meaning; the secondary usage or lakșanā gives the meaning of the example. The ‘purpose’(prayojana) of this sentence is to show that success comes to three types of people: the warrior, men of knowledge and to the one who serve. Hence, the meaning of this example is understood through the three semantic operations i.e. ābḥīḍḥā , lakșanā and vyañjanā. First of all, the literal meaning (abhidhā) is considered as the literal sense is not applicable in the present context; therefore, we need another potency of a word to derive meaning, that is, lakșanā. The poet’s purpose is to praise the 3  warriors, men of knowledge and those who serve others. Rather than praising them directly, he uses the secondary sense in order to suggest (vyañjanā) the great value of the three kinds of people. Its realization is also dependant on the capacity of apprehension inherent in the responsive reader. (sahradaya) and his imaginative experience.

Suggested sense can arise based upon either denotative sense or intended sense. That is they can be,

•       Ābḥīḍḥāṃūḷā

•       Ḷākṣāṇāṃūḷā

In the first, there is no part played by lakșanā, ḍḥvāṇī proceeds directly on the basis of primary sense. In the second ḍḥvāṇī is based upon lakșanā, the primary sense being insignificant. In Ḷākṣāṇāṃūḷā  primary sense may either become amalgamated with the new sense or get itself destroyed completely. Accordingly there are two subdivisions of it.

ĀṚṬḤĀṆṬĀRĀ- ṢĀṂKṚĀṂĪṬĀ  VĀĆYĀ

i.e where the implication modifies the primary sense (literal meaning is set aside)

ĀṬĀYĀṆṬ –ṬĪṚṢKṚṬṬĀ VĀĆYĀ

Where the implied sense entirely reverses the primary sense (literal meaning is shifted)

DEFINITION AND VARIETIES OF ḌḤVĀṆĪ:

      Ḍḥvāṇyāḷokā defines ḍḥvāṇī  as follows,

“That kind of poetry wherein either the meaning or the word, renders itself or its meaning secondary and suggests the implied meaning is designated by the learned as ḍḥvāṇī  or suggestive poetry”

(ḍḥvāṇī  is a type of poetry wherein words and sense lose their primary signification in order to suggest other things)

    On the basis of suggested idea ḍḥVĀṇĪ  is divided into three varieties,

•       Vastu ḍḥvāṇī  

•       Ṛāṣā ḍḥvāṇī  

•       Aḷāṃkāṛ ḍḥvāṇī  

VASTU ḌḤVĀṆĪ

When the suggested sense is of the nature of a mere appealing idea it is vastu ḍḥvāṇī .

“Ramble freely, pious man!

That dog to-day is killed By the fierce lion that dwells

In Goda river dells.”

In the example, the woman is telling the religious man to wander freely in the garden because a lion has killed the dog that used to scare him. Though the direct meaning of these words is injunction, the suggestive meaning is prohibition, because a person, who is scared of a dog obviously cannot face a lion. Abhinavagupta lays stress on the power of suggestion, and argues that the present example cannot be understood either from its denotative meaning, or indicative meaning. It is not denotation because of samketāgrahaṇa. The power of direct designation exhausts after it has once operated. It cannot designate two different things ‘go’ and ‘not go’ at the same time. It can mean directly only one of these; the other meaning must be furnished by a different power viz. suggestion.

ĀḶĀṂKĀṚĀ ḌḤVĀṆĪ

When the suggested sense is that of a poetic figure it is āḷāṃkāṛā ḍḥvāṇī . Here the expressed sense may or may not be an āḷāṃkāṛā but the suggested sense should clearly convey the āḷāṃkāṛā.

 

 

 

“Why this jest?

Thou shalt not certainly part again from me

, Having returned after so long,

O ruthless one! Whence this flair for travel?_

Thus in dreams do the wives of your enemy speak

But soon they awake

To find empty their embraces

And to lament loud.”

 

 In this example, all that the poet wants to convey is that the king has killed all his enemies. Instead of saying this plainly, as it would be without much force, the poet manages to convey the idea by making a comparison with another situation. The poet tells the king that all his enemies’ wives hug their husbands in their dreams and lament why they left them and had come back after so many days. So on awaking, they realize their empty enclosed arms and they scream out sorrowfully, realizing that they were only dreaming the arrival of their dead husbands. Here, the poet heightens the valour of the king by making a comparison between the dream and reality. The agony of the widows of his enemies embellishes the greatness of the king, just as a face of a beautiful girl gets embellished by comparing it to the full moon in all its glory. In such poetic situations, the poet uses āḷāṃkāṛās (figures of speech) to heighten the poetic impact.

 

ṚĀṢĀ ḌḤVĀṆĪ  

When the expressed sense consists in the portrayal of vībḥāvās, āṇūbḥāvās and vyabhicharibhavas and consequently the suggested content evoke Rasa, it is rasa ḍḥvāṇī .

“A tremulousness of the eyes,

Hesitating in mid-glance;

Limbs daily growing thinner

Like severed lotus stems

And cheeks so pale they seemed

To imitate white durva grass:

Such was the costume put on by the gopis

As they and Krishna came of age.”

 In the above example, Krishna is at the peak of his youth and so are the gopis. The gopis look at the young Krishna, not directly but catch glimpses of him. Just as a lotus which has been cut off, becomes dry, the gopis too have become skinny and lifeless without Krishna’s love. Their lips have become so dry and yellow that even dry and pale grass appears to be more colorful. In this example, the poet conveys abhilasā (desire), cintā (worry), autsukya (eagerness), nidrā (sleep), adhrti (frailty), glāni (drooping), ālasya (languor), ṣrama (weariness), smrti (remembrance), vitarka (speculation) and the likes without mentioning or naming them. Out of these varieties Rasa ḍḥvāṇī  occupies the first position. G.Vijayvardhan says,

“Rasa is the supreme goal in kavya as well as in any work of art. In the function of suggestion too, the prime aim is evocation of rasa.”

CLASSIFICATION OF ḌḤVĀṆĪ

On the basis of the presence of suggested sense Dhvanyaloka divided poetry into three grades,

•       Ūṭṭāṃ kāvyā  

•       Ṃāḍḥyām kāvyā  

•       Āḍḥāṃ ćīṭṛā kāvyā  

•       Ūṭṭāṃ kāvyā  

In the first grade of kavya the suggested signification alone matters. It represents the highest and best kind of poetry which may be termed as ḍḥvāṇī  kavya.

•       Ṃāḍḥyām kāvyā  

The second class of poetry is Madhyam kavya, in which the suggested significance is lost in the primary charm of the expressed sense. Suggestion is present but only has a secondary importance. This kind of poetry is also called gunibhut vyangya kavya.

•       Āḍḥāṃ ćīṭṛā kāvyā  

 The third class of poetry is given the name of Chitra, pictorial poetry. It is the lowest grade of     poetry-as the element of suggestion plays no part in it. Rasa receives hardly any attention in this variety of poetry.  This is the lowest type of poetry because it is only by the aid of several striking figures that the author makes his composition picturesque. Ṛāṣā- ḍḥvāṇī  is the vital essence of poetry which lacks in ćīṭṛā kāvyā  .

 

CONCLUSION

Unlike the ancient writers on Sanskrit rhetoric who aimed at nothing more than the provision of elaborate systems and devices. Āṇāṇḍvāṛḍḥāṇā enunciated the broad general principles of poetry based on an insight into the psychology of human nature. Āṇāṇḍvāṛḍḥāṇāa demonstrated that emotive and suggestive significance is the very soul of poetry. By thoroughly explaining the linguistic and logical implications of the theory of ḍḥvāṇī  he tried to secure for it a high place of honour in the eyes of thinkers. K.Krishmurthi has appreciated the theory by saying,

“It marks the termination of the old school of criticism and gives the birth of a modern school, modern in style, in theory and in approach.”