Kāvya

yadyapi pūrvānusāreṇa candrādayas tasya dṛṣṭāntatā-leśam api nārhanti

yadyapi pūrvānusāreṇa candrādayas tasya dṛṣṭāntatā-leśam api nārhanti, tathāpi sādhāraṇa-lokānāṁ tad-dvārā tan-mahima-praveśārtham eva te dṛṣṭāntitāḥ | yatra tu tad-antaraṅga-parikarair api tādṛśaṁ varṇyate, tatra sākṣād bhagavad-vibhūti-rūpa-tal-līlā-parikarā eva candrādayo dṛṣṭāntitā iti sarvatra jñeyam |
(Durgama-saṅgamanī-ṭīkā on Bhakti-rasāmṛta-sindhu: 2.1.46)

“Although, in accord with the former [comment made earlier on this subject in regard to BRS 1.1.1], the moon and so forth are not fit even in the least to be objects of comparison with him [i.e., Śrī Kṛṣṇa], still they are cited as objects of comparison [with him] for the purpose of common people’s entering into his greatness thereby. Where, however, such [objects of comparison] are described even by his intimate retinue, there only the moon and so forth that are directly [part of] the retinue in his līlā in the form of Bhagavān’s splendors (vibhūtis) are cited as objects of comparison [with him]. This is to be understood in all cases.”

Read on →

nṛpo na hari-sevitā vyaya-kṛtī na hary-arpakaḥ

nṛpo na hari-sevitā vyaya-kṛtī na hary-arpakaḥ
kavir na hari-varṇakaḥ śrita-gurur na hary-āśritaḥ |
guṇī na hari-tatparaḥ sarala-dhīr na kṛṣṇāśrayaḥ
sa na vraja-ramānugaḥ sva-hṛdi sapta-śalyāni me ||
(Gopāla-campū: 1.33.178)

“A king who is not a servant of Hari,

A spender who is not an offerer to Hari,

A poet who is not a narrator of Hari,

A disciple of a guru who is not sheltered in Hari,

A virtuous person who is not devoted to Hari,

A simple [alt., sincere, unpretentious] person who is not sheltered in Hari,

And he [i.e., one who is sheltered in Hari] who is not a follower of the beautiful ladies of Vraja—

[These seven types of persons] Are seven spears in my own heart.”

Read on →

sargabandho mahākāvyam ucyate tasya lakṣaṇam

sargabandho mahākāvyam ucyate tasya lakṣaṇam |
āśīr namaskriyā vastu-nirdeśo vāpi tan-mukham ||
(Kāvyādarśa: 1.14)

“That [composition] which is constructed in sections is called a mahākāvya [‘epic poem’]. Its characteristic is that its opening is a blessing (āśīḥ), an offering of obeisance (namaskriyā), or [may also include] a specification of [its] subject-matter.”

Read on →

eteṣāṁ tu tathā-bhāve bhagavat-kāvya-nāṭyayoḥ

eteṣāṁ tu tathā-bhāve bhagavat-kāvya-nāṭyayoḥ |
sevām āhuḥ paraṁ hetuṁ kecit tat-pakṣa-rāgiṇaḥ ||
kintu tatra sudustarka-mādhuryādbhuta-sampadaḥ |
rater asyāḥ prabhāvo’yaṁ bhavet kāraṇam uttamam ||
(Bhakti-rasāmṛta-sindhu: 2.5.90–91)

“Some [paṇḍitas] who are fond of that view [i.e., the view of conventional kāvya (poetics) and nāṭya (dramaturgy)] say that honoring kāvya and nāṭya related to Bhagavān [i.e., listening to recitations of kāvya, watching performances of nāṭya, and so on] is the primary cause in their being such [i.e., of vibhāvas, anubhāvas, etc. manifesting], but therein [i.e., in regard to vibhāvas, anubhāvas, etc.] this [present] influence of rati for him [i.e., Bhagavān], which is endowed with the wondrous excellence of highly incomprehensible sweetness, is the ultimate cause.”

Read on →

kiṁ kāvyena kaves tasya kiṁ kāṇḍena dhanuṣmataḥ

kiṁ kāvyena kaves tasya kiṁ kāṇḍena dhanuṣmataḥ |
parasya hṛdaye lagnaṁ na ghūrṇayati yac chiraḥ ||
(Nala-campū: 1.5; cited in Caitanya-caritāmṛta: 3.1.195)

“What good is a poet’s poetry or a bowman’s arrow which strikes the heart of another but do not cause the head [of the other] to spin?”

Read on →

itara-pāpa-phalāni yathecchayā

itara-pāpa-phalāni yathecchayā
vitara tāni sahe caturānana |
arasikeṣu kavitva-nivedanaṁ
śirasi mā likha mā likha mā likha ||
(Mahāsubhāṣita-saṅgraha)

“I shall bear [all] those other reactions to my sins you allocate as per your wish, O Brahmā. Just do not write, do not write, do not write on my forehead, “Presenting poetics to the tasteless.”

Read on →

sarva-laukikātīte’pi tasmin laukikārtha-viśeṣopamā-dvārā

sarva-laukikātīte’pi tasmin laukikārtha-viśeṣopamā-dvārā lokānāṁ buddhi-praveśaḥsyād iti kenāpy aṁśenopameyam |
(Durgama-saṅgamanī-ṭīkā on Bhakti-rasāmṛta-sindhu: 1.1.1)

“People’s intellect can have [some limited] entrance into that [i.e., the subject matter of Śrī Kṛṣṇa, bhakti-rasa, and so forth], even though it is beyond everything of the world, through comparisons [made] with particular worldly objects. Thus, it is comparable in some respect [i.e., things of the world can be compared to particular aspects of it as required to convey general knowledge of those aspects of its nature].”

Read on →

kāvya-śāstra-vinodena kālo gacchati dhīmatām

kāvya-śāstra-vinodena kālo gacchati dhīmatām | 
vyasanena tu mūrkhāṇāṁ nidrayā kalahena vā ||
(Hitopadeśa: Mitra-lābha, 1)

“The time of the wise is spent with the joy of kāvya-śāstra, whereas that of fools with vice, sleep, and quarrel.”

Read on →

saṁsāra-viṣa-vṛkṣasya dve phale hy amṛtopame

saṁsāra-viṣa-vṛkṣasya dve phale hy amṛtopame |
kāvyāmṛta-rasāsvādaḥ saṅgamaḥ sajjanaiḥ saha ||
(Subhāṣita-ratna-bhāṇḍāgāra)

“On the poisonous tree of saṁsāra only two fruits are like nectar: tasting the rasa of the nectar of poetry (kāvya) and associating with sādhus.”

Read on →

Scroll to Top