In the second canto of Śiśupālavadha, the poet Māgha uses ideas from various sciences to support his arguments on polity. It is appropriate that he has included literary aesthetics as well. A few observations in this section are worth noting:
बह्वपि स्वेच्छया कामं प्रकीर्णमभिधीयते।
अनुज्झितार्थसम्बन्धः प्रबन्धो दुरुदाहरः॥(2.73)
Though Rāghava was the elder of the two, he immediately accepted the advice of Lakṣmaṇa, recognising the essential truth the latter had spoken. Accordingly, the brothers went ahead searching for Sītā in all possible places. They spotted the illustrious Jaṭāyu, as huge as a mountain peak, drenched in blood. Immediately, Rāma told Lakṣmaṇa, “Sītā has been undoubtedly devoured by this creature. This is certainly a rākṣasa, who roams around in the forest in the form of a vulture. Look at him! He lies there comfortably, having killed my beloved.
Once there lived a noble king called Jānaśruti. His practices were rooted in dharma and always involved in dāna. He had arranged daily santarpaṇa in his palace. He also had built chatras all over his kingdom. His fame knew no bounds. He had all the merit required to attain the brahmajñāna. Only thing lacking was a good guru.
Let us now reflect a little upon its meaning.
1.Om
tasmādomityudāhṛtya yajñadānatapaḥkriyāḥ |
pravartante vidhānoktāḥ satatam brahmavādinām ||BG 17.24
"The votaries of Brahma perform yajña, dāna and tapas after uttering Om".
मर्त्यानां वियद्विहारवाञ्छा चिरनिरूढैव। विहायसि विहरन्तं विहङ्गवृन्दं वारं वारं पश्यत्सु मानवेषु डिडयिषा समुत्पन्नेति जीवविकासवादिनो विद्वांसो मन्वते। प्रायेण गतेषूपशतेषु वर्षेषु लिप्सेयं शक्यसाध्या समभूदिति तन्त्रज्ञानेतिहासाद्विज्ञायते। परं भौतशिल्पवैचित्र्याणां प्रागेव कल्पनाजगति विहरद्भिः सुकविभिः काङ्क्षेयं वागर्थमाध्यमेन साधितेति साहितीविदामपरोक्षम्। काव्यमार्गमनुसरन्त्यो नृत्यचित्रशिल्पाद्याः कलाश्च मानवस्य गगनगमनतर्षं स्वेन स्वेन माध्यमेन यथाकामं तर्पयामासुरित्यस्य वर्तन्त एव साक्ष्यभूताः परःशताः कौशलचमत्काराः। भौतादिशास्त्रानुरोधेन वसुवर्त्मविहृतिर्महतीं साधनसामग्रीमपेक्षते। किन्तु
As she was being carried away by Rāvaṇa, Sītā was stricken with misery. With her eyes red with anger, she said, “You don’t appear to feel ashamed for performing this ignoble deed. I’m sure it was you, a vicious coward, who contrived to get my husband away by resorting to the illusion of a deer, so that you can carry me off. You even struck down the brave creature that tried to save me. You have displayed wonderful prowess, O vilest of rākṣasas! You did not win me in a battle! People around the world will forever speak of this despicable deed of yours.
Arjuna now asks
ye śāstravidhimutsṛjya yajante śraddhāyānvitāh ।
teṣāṃ niṣṭhā tu kā kṛṣṇa sattvamāho rājastamah ॥BG 17.1
Some people in the world possess śraddhā, but not in the rules of the śāstra but in something else imagined by themselves. What happens to them?
Among the works written by the great poet Bāṇabhaṭṭa, it is only in Harṣacarita that we come across thoughts on literary aesthetics. Although the introductory verses in Kādambarī contain a couple of statements on the art of poetry, they are not directly linked to poetic theory. Besides, they are not very illuminating. Therefore, Harṣacarita is our only source. And it does not disappoint us.
The poet has this to say about pilferers of poetry at the beginning of the work:
Back in the āśrama, Sītā heard the cry of distress, which sounded just like her husband and with great anxiety she instructed Lakṣmaṇa, “Go and find out what has happened to Rāghava, for my very life is perturbed by the sound of his cry of anguish. Rush to your brother’s rescue, Lakṣmaṇa! He has fallen into the hands of rākṣasas, like a bull fallen prey to lions.” Recalling his brother’s instruction, Lakṣmaṇa did not go. Angered by this, Sītā said, “Saumitri! You are your brother’s enemy, masquerading as a friend. You refuse to aid him when he is in danger.