Prakrit Verses in Dhvanyāloka with Locana
By V. M. Kulkarni
Summary
The essay “Prakrit Verses in Dhvanyaloka with Locana” examines two important Prakrit couplets that appear in Anandavardhana’s influential treatise on Sanskrit poetics. Dhvanyāloka, composed in the 9th century, is famous for introducing the concept of dhvani (suggestion) as a central feature of literary expression. Its Sanskrit commentary Locana, written by the Kashmiri polymath Abhinavagupta, provides extended discussion of the verses and gives a Sanskrit chāyā (gloss) for each Prakrit line. The article explores how the vernacular Prakrit couplets are used to illustrate the subtle difference between simple denotation and the layers of implied meaning that arise through dhvani. By translating the verses and analysing Abhinavagupta’s remarks, the author shows that the Prakrit language, with its softer sounds and colloquial flavour, was deliberately chosen to convey the intimate moods of love and tenderness that Sanskrit sometimes struggles to capture. The article situates the verses within the larger context of Indian poetics, contrasting Anandavardhana’s theory of suggestion with older systems based on figures of speech and metre. It argues that the inclusion of Prakrit verses demonstrates the aesthetic flexibility of early Sanskrit critics, who did not view regional languages as inferior but rather as potent vehicles for conveying poetic rasa (flavour). The author also compares Abhinavagupta’s interpretations with later commentaries, highlighting differences in reading and pointing out textual corruptions in some recensions of the Locana. The essay concludes that, far from being casual insertions, the Prakrit verses are integral to Anandavardhana’s argument: they illustrate that suggestion operates across languages and that poets draw on multiple linguistic traditions to achieve evocative power.
Conclusion
The study demonstrates that Anandavardhana and Abhinavagupta consciously drew on Prakrit poetry to exemplify their theory of suggestion. By analysing the verses and commentary, the author shows that the concept of dhvani transcended linguistic boundaries and that Prakrit’s lyrical qualities were valued by Sanskrit aestheticians. This insight enriches our understanding of early Indian poetics and underscores the inclusive nature of classical literary criticism.