THEORY OF DHVANI

In regard to the method of poetry the attention of the Pracina School is confined to
poetic expression, consisting of words and their explicit meaning. Expression has two
aspects-- the word (sabda) and its explicit meaning (vacyartha). Whatever quality in
word and meaning lends charm to the expression is regarded by these writers as an
excellence (guna) and whatever mars the beauty of expression, either in word or in
meaning, is regarded as a blemish (dosa). The presence of guna and the absence of dosa
ensure beauty (carutva, sobha) in the expression and thus make it a source of delight.
Some writers do not make a clear distinction between guna and alamkara. In so far as
alamkara is distinguished from guna, it is assigned a role subordinate to the expression
rendered beautiful by the presence of gunas and the absence of dosas.

When we come to the Navina School of aesthetic thinkers beginning with

Anandavardhana (middle of the ninth century AD), we find that the type of poetry, which
has emotion (bhava) for its theme, has won recognition as superior to the other one. An
emotion cannot be described or expressed in words. Hence it cannot be directly
communicated to the reader. What the poet can and does express are only the causes and
results of the emotion, that is, the situation in which the emotion is manifested. Yet,
through the description of the situation the reader understands the emotion and derives that
exalted delight called rasa. Thus the method by which the content of the poem gets
communicated to the reader is indirect.

Language, according to the later aestheticians, has the power of conveying a

meaning by suggestion, or indication, apart from the power of communication by overt
expression. The meaning suggested by the words is called vyangyartha. It is different
from and beyond the meaning explicitly and directly conveyed by the words (vacyartha).
When the content of a poem is emotion (bhava), the method necessarily consists in
suggested meaning, or vyangyartha, which is also called dhvani. Dhvani is the real core
of the poetic method---its ‘atman’ (kavyasyatma dhvani). The attention of the Pracina
School was confined to the expression, the mere ‘body’ of poetry. The Navina School
points out that the reader should not stop with the expression if the poetic content is an
emotion but go into the meaning that is suggested, or hinted, by it. From this point of
view gunas and dosas acquire a new definition. They do not stand for beauty and
ugliness, respectively, of the expression, but for the fitness (aucitya) or otherwise of the
expression to suggest a further meaning. As regards alamkaras, the Navina School points
out that they are nothing but ornaments in the body of poetry, namely the expression.
They are therefore useful in the outer type of poetry dealing with nature and human
activities but have little use in emotional poetry. Thus the Navina School does not reject
the contribution made by the Pracina School but only puts it in the right perspective.
Sabda and vacyartha are no longer valuable in themselves but only in subordinate relation
to vyangyartha or dhvani.

The credit for formulating the theory of dhvani goes entirely to Anandavardhana,
the author of the Dhvanyaloka. The title means ‘the lusture’ (aloka) of ‘suggested
meaning’ (dhvani). The concept was not entirely unknown to poeticians before
Aanandavardhana. Traces of the idea are found in their writings. But these writers did
not accord any independent status to dhvani. Neither Bharata nor his early commentators
had said anything about dhvani as the method of communicating the emotional content of

Literariness.org Page 1
drama to the spectator. Bharata took the communication of the emotion for granted and
discussed only the necessary relation of the content, bhava, to the experience called rasa.
There was some opposition to the theory of dhvani from both poeticians and
dramaturgists. But a century after Anandavardhana, Abhinavagupta (980 to 1020 AD)
refuted all the criticisms of the concept of dhvani and established it for all time as an
indisputable method of artistic communication. By commenting on Bharata’s
Natyasastra and Anandavardhana’s Dhvanyaloka, Abhinavagupta, in his
Abhinavabharati, brought out the inseparable relation of bhava to dhvani, which
culminates in rasa. By the time of Mammata (1050 to 1100 AD) all opposition to dhvani
had died down. Beginning with Mammata and running as far as the seventeenth century
there came a series of writers who elaborated, systematized and expounded the creative
work of Bharata, Anandavardhana and Abhinavagupta. The last well known among
these writers was Jagannatha who lived in the middle of the seventeenth century (1620
to1660).

We may speak of three broad periods in the history of the Indian Philosophy of art.
The period from the first century BC to the middle of the ninth century AD may be
described as the period of formulation, during which Bharata enunciated the concepts of
bhava and rasa and Anandavardhana formulated the concept of dhvani. Then from the
middle of the ninth century to the middle of the eleventh century we have a period of
consolidation, when the concept of dhvani had to be defended against opponents. The
third and final one, extending from the middle of the eleventh century to as far as the
seventeenth century, is the period of exposition of the relationship between bhava, dhvani
and rasa.

The Navina School of Alamkarikas beginning with Anandavardhana recognized

that emotion (bhava) is the best theme for poetry. With this recognition they had to
explain how the emotional content of a poem gets communicated to the reader. It was in
answer to this problem that they discovered the concept of dhvani. Before dhvani was
recognized as a type of meaning, three types of meanings were usually ascribed to
language, namely the primary (mukhya or vacyartha), the secondary (laksya) and the
syntactical (tatparya). But what the primary meaning stands for is only the situation,
consisting of the causes and effects of the emotion. It is from the description of the
situation that the reader catches the underlying emotion. The suggested meaning
(vyangyartha) is arrived at indirectly from the words through the medium of the primary
meaning. The power in language by which vyangyartha is said to be conveyed is called
vyanjana-vrtti.

Anandavardhana takes the term dhvani from the grammarians for his theory of
poetic suggestion. The grammarians use the term dhvani for the sounds of utterances,
which reveal the integral linguistic sign (sphota). Similarly a good poem with its sound
as well as literal sense reveals a charming sense which has great aesthetic value. On
account of this similarity of function the term dhvani is applied to suggestive poetry when
the suggested sense predominates over the literal sense. The term is also used to denote
the suggested sense or the function of suggestion. In poetry, that which suggests
(vyanjaka) is the poet’s description of a situation. That which is suggested (vyangya) is
an emotion either permanent (sthayibhava) or transitory (vyabhicaribhava). The process
of suggestion (vyanjana) consists in how the words and their primary meaning suggest the
emotion. It connects the suggester and the suggested.

Literariness.org Page 2
 In his Dhvanyaloka Anandavardhana establishes his theory that suggestion is the
soul of poetry. The expressed sense is invariably an idea or a figure of speech. But the
suggested sense may be of three kinds: an idea, a figure of speech or an emotion. Only
men of taste who know the essence of poetry understand the suggested sense. This
suggested sense is the soul of poetry. Such poetry is the highest type of poetry (dhvani-
kavya). Poetry in which the suggested sense is subordinate to the expressed sense is
called gunibhuta-vyangya-kavya. This poetry too has some charm. But poetry that does
not contain any suggested sense (citra-kavya) cannot be considered good poetry however
charming the expressed sense. The quality of poetry depends on the importance given to
the element of suggestion.

The doctrine of dhvani is only an extension of the rasa theory propounded by the
ancient sage Bharata, according to which the main object of a dramatic work is to rouse
rasa in the audience. Anandavardhana extended this theory to poetry also. There is no
conflict between the theory of dhvani and the theory of rasa: the former stresses the
method of treatment whereas the latter deals with the ultimate effect. Suggestion in
drama or poetry must be charming. Emotions cannot be expressed directly by words.
They can only be suggested.

CRITICISM AGAINST THE DHVANI THEORY

In the Dhvanyaloka Anandavardhana refers to many of the views against the

doctrine of dhvani. Some hold that it does not exist, some say that it is included in
laksana (secondary meaning) and others consider dhvani to be something beyond the
province of words, which is known only to men of literary taste. Others have tried to
include it under anumana (inference) and some have thought the concept to be absurd.
The main arguments against dhvani are:

DHVANI AND ANUMANA

The Naiyayikas (logicians) reject the suggestive power of words. Mahimabhatta

says that the implied sense in literature is always conveyed by the expressed sense through
the process of inference. According to the later Naiyayikas, vyangyartha or suggested
sense of a word is really inferred from its primary and secondary meanings and is not
separate from them. Precision and accuracy are the chief objects of logic and it should
always demand the use of a word in its plain, primary and unambiguous sense. Logic
accepts the secondary meaning also since it can be ascertained with a fair amount of
accuracy through the primary meaning. But the suggested meaning is vague and fleeting.
Logic whose only appeal is to reason, takes accuracy and precision as indispensable and
recognizes only as much of the suggested sense as can reasonably be inferred from the
expressed sense; the subtle and subjective suggestion implied in language are not subjects
of logical discussion. In the Tractatus, Wittgenstein laid down that ‘whatever can be
said, can be said clearly. And what we cannot speak about, we must leave in silence.’
Great poetry is written in the fringe of that silence; it aims at conveying the inexpressible,
by means of suggestion. The suggested sense plays an important part in poetry where the
appeal is more to the emotion and sentiment than to reason. In Introduction to
Metaphysics, Bergson says, ‘Language is incapable of apprehending and expressing
reality. But language may be used in another way, not to represent, but to bring the
hearer to a point where he himself may transcend language and pass to incommunicable
insight. It is a dialectical ladder which, when we have ascended, may be kicked away.’

Literariness.org Page 3
This insight and intuition cannot be expressed directly by words, but they can be
communicated through the power of suggestion.

Anandavardhana illustrates his point by means of an analogy. He says that the

relation between the expressed sense and the implied sense is something similar to that
between a light and a pot; the light reveals the pot, even though there is no invariable
relation between the two.

DHVANI AND ARTHAPATTI

Arthapatti is a kind of immediate inference. Jespersen defines suggestion as

impression through suppression. He says, ‘in all speech activity there are three things to
be distinguished: expression, suppression and impression. Expression is what the speaker
gives, suppression is what he does not give, though he might have given it, and impression
is what the hearer receives. It is important to notice that an impression is often produced
not only by what is said expressly, but also by what is suppressed. Suggestion is
impression by suppression.’ In ordinary sentences, the individual words give only their
isolated meanings, leaving the samsarga or the mutual relation of the words to be
conveyed by suppression or suggestion. Samsarga is cognized through a process of
inference of the arthapatti type. Even in laksana the transferred sense is obtained
through arthapatti. Mukulabhatta quotes the well-known example of ‘the fat boy who
does not eat during the day’ as a variety of laksna. Arthapatti, being a means of valid
knowledge, implies accuracy and definiteness of the sense cognized through it; but in
poetic suggestion the implied sense is rather vague and can be fully understood only by
men of literary taste.

DHVANI AND LAKSANA

Some of the Alamkarikas like Mukulabhatta tried to include vyanjana or the

suggestive power under laksana. Mukulabhatta defines laksana in such a way that all
instances where the expressed sense indicates other ideas are included in it, and he says
that dhvani, propounded as a new doctrine by some literary critics actually falls within the
sphere of laksana itself.

Anandavardhana refers to this anti-dhvani theory and says that laksana and dhvani
differ from each other with regard to their nature and subject matter. Laksana operates
when there is some kind of inconsistency in the primary sense; it indicates the secondary
metaphorical sense after cancelling its primary sense; but in suggestion the primary sense
need not be discarded. Laksana is based on the primary sense of a word and is its
extension; it is part of the primary sense itself and some have called it the tail of the
primary sense (abhidhapuccha). Dhvani, on the other hand, depends on suggestion.
And suggestion can occur even in cases where there is absolutely no expressed sense, as in
the case of emotion suggested by the sound of music or the sight of dances. The emotive
element in language can never be explained in terms of the expressive or the metaphorical
senses of words. In laksana the implied sense is always indicated indirectly through the
primary sense of the word. But in the case of dhvani it is possible for both the meanings
to occur almost simultaneously. Again, the suggested sense is determined by the
contextual factors, the intonation, the facial expression, gestures, etc., whereas laksana, as
well as abhidha (primary signification), are independent.

Literariness.org Page 4
 Even the subjects of laksana and dhvani are different. The meaning conveyed by
laksana is always an idea; but the suggested sense can be an idea, a figure of speech or an
emotion.

Anandavardhana says that laksana operates only when there is inconsistency of the
primary sense and that its function is exhausted when this inconsistency is removed by
resorting to the secondary meaning which is related to the primary sense. In the example
‘the village is on the Ganga,’ the primary meaning of the word Ganga is the river Ganges.
This cannot be applied in the sentence because the village cannot stand on the river. This
makes one adopt the secondary interpretation in which the term ‘Ganga’ is interpreted as
indicating ‘the bank of the Ganges.’ Thus, the discrepancy is removed and with that the
power of laksana is also exhausted. The ideas of holiness and purity that are suggested
by the statement cannot be implied by laksana. It is determined by the emotional
atmosphere, which envelops the word and is something elusive. Even in the absence of
laksana the word Ganga can suggest the qualities of purity and sanctity. Laksana does
not give the suggested sense, but it points the way to the richness of the ideas associated
with the word. It leads the way to the land of suggestion.

DHVANI AND ABHIDHA

Certain schools consider dhvani to be included in the primary function abhidha

itself. There is no restriction to the scope of the significative force of a word. Just as the
range of an arrow can be extended farther and farther depending on the force with which it
is discharged, the meaning of a word can be extended to any length. Anandavardhana
and his followers attack this view. The suggested sense cannot be conveyed by the power
of abhidha, for it is only the definite conventional sense, which is directly related to the
word that is conveyed by abhidha. The power of the primary function of the word is
exhausted when this task is performed. Even the sentence meaning cannot be expressed
by the words through the primary function alone. Another function has to be accepted to
explain suggested meanings. The primary sense is directly related to the word but the
suggested sense is, at times known only indirectly through the expressed sense.

Moreover, suggestion need not always depend on words; the melody of music,
gestures, etc., are suggestive of sense. The primary sense is definite and fixed; but the
suggested sense changes according to the changes in the contextual factors. The primary
sense of a word can be objectively learned by any one from a lexicon; but the suggested
sense in poetry can be fully appreciated only by men of taste.

DHVANI AND TATPARYAVRTTI

Some Alamkarikas like Dhanika and Dhanamjaya include dhvani under

tatparyavrtti, a function of the sentence postulated to explain the verbal comprehension
arising from a sentence. The direct relation of the word is to its isolated meaning. In a
sentence the primary function of the words is exhausted. The mutual relation of the
isolated word-meanings or the samsarga as it is called is not conveyed by the words
directly. It is not expressed, it is only suggested. This is done according to them by
tatparyavrtti. Some of the later Alamkarikas have accepted tatparya almost as
synonymous with suggestion.

Literariness.org Page 5
 But tataparyavrtti is postulated to explain the literal meaning of a sentence,
whereas vyanjana comes at the next stage. The power of the former is exhausted by
establishing the logical connection of the word meanings, and cannot give further
suggestions. Tatparya pertains to the expressed sense, whereas dhvani pertains to non-
expressive factors also such as music, gesture etc.

DHVANI AND VAKROKTI

In the Vakroktijivita, Kuntaka denied the independent existence of dhvani, and

included it under vakrokti or ‘a striking mode of speech.’ His vakrokti is all pervading
and is almost analogous to dhvani itself.

CLASSIFICATION OF DHVANI

1. As suggested sense, or what is suggested (vyangya):

When what is suggested is a fact (vastu) it is called vastu-dhvani and when an

alamkara is suggested it is called alamkara-dhvani. When a transitory emotion
(vyabhicaribhava) is suggested the suggested sense is called bhava-dhvani and when a
permanent emotion (sthayibhava) is suggested it is called rasa-dhvani because the
sthayibhava culminates in rasa.

2. As the means to suggestion, or that which suggests (vyanjaka):

The primary meaning, secondary meaning, parts and aspects of a word such as letters,
prefixes and suffixes, phrases, clauses and sentences all can be used for suggestion
according to the situations in which they are used. If we extend the above argument, we
may treat even the work as a whole as a suggester.

3. As the process of suggestion (vyanjana):

Depending on whether the suggestion is effected through the primary meaning or

the secondary meaning dhvani is divided into two types: Avivaksita-vacya and
vivaksitanyapara-vacya. The former is based on laksana (secondary meaning) and is
called laksanamula; in this type the literal meaning is not intended. Corresponding to the
two varieties of laksana namely jahallaksana and ajahallaksana, the avivaksita-vacya
type of dhvani is also subdivided into two; atyantatiraskrta where the literal sense is
completely set-aside (as in calling a fool an intelligent person) and arthantarasamkramita-
vacya where the literal meaning is shifted. This second sub-variety comprises cases
where a word is used in an enhanced or diminished sense. In the example ‘dirty clothes
are not clothes,’ ‘not clothes’ only means ‘clothes not in the fullest sense of the term.’ An
example of this type of dhvani given by Anandavardhana is, ‘Only when favoured by the
rays of the sun are lotuses lotuses.’ Here lotuses carries the meaning ‘lotuses in the full
sense of the word; lotuses with all the qualities of beauty which make them worth being
called lotuses.’

The second division of dhvani, vivaksitanyapara-vacya is sometimes also called

abhidhamula as it is based on abhidha or the primary meaning of the word. In this type
the literal sense is in fact intended, but serves the implied sense. This is also divided into
two sub-varieties--- (1) samlaksyakrama-vyangya where the stages of realizing the

Literariness.org Page 6
suggested sense from the expressed sense can be well perceived. Here the vibhavas etc.,
are not expressly mentioned and they have to be gathered from the context and hence the
stages in the realization of the emotions will be perceptible. (2) asamlaksyakrama-
vyangya where the stages in the realization of the suggested sense are imperceptible. The
latter is more important and is concerned with the suggestion of poetic emotion. Here the
intermediate steps between the understanding of the expressed sense (in the form of
vibhavas, anubhavas and vyabhicaribhavas) and the realization of rasa are not perceived.

The type of dhvani called samlaksyakrama-vyanga is again subdivided into vastu-

dhvani where a fact is suggested and alamkaradhvani where the suggested element is a
figure of speech. It can be classified from another point of view, into that based on words
(sabda-saktimula) and that based on the meanings (arthasaktimula). In the former the
actual words used are vital to the suggestion and cannot be substituted by their synonyms,
while in the latter it is the contextual factors and the social and cultural background that
are important in bringing about the suggestion. Or it may be based on both at the same
time (ubhayasaktimula).

In the Sahityadarpana, Visvanatha criticizes Anandavardhana for including under

poetry suggestions of a fact or a figure of speech. He says that the suggestion of poetic
emotion alone can be considered as the soul of poetry and refuses to recognize any piece
of poetry in which emotional elements are absent. Anandavardhana himself was fully
conscious of the importance of emotional elements in poetry. Abhinavagupta makes the
idea clear by saying that suggestion that leads to rasa alone is the soul of poetry and that
the suggestion of ideas and figures of speech (vastu-dhvani and alamkara-dhvani)
ultimately terminates in the development of rasa.

In sabdasaktimula-dhvani suggestion is effected through the power of the word.

In the case of homonymous expression (slesa) if both the meanings are applicable in the
context, the meanings are known through the primary sense abhidha. But if one is
contextual and the other non-contextual, the power of abhidha might bring the
recollection of both, but the contextual factors will restrict it to one of the meanings. In
sabdasaktimula-dhvani, suggestion is based on the actual words used, and the words
cannot be substituted by their synonyms.

Arthasaktimula-dhvani is based on the expressed meaning. The suggested sense

need not be an idea or a figure so speech. Under this type are included instances where
the emotions and transient feelings are suggested from contextual factors, without the
express mention of the vibhavas, anubhavas etc. Even though the primary sense of a
word is definite and fixed it can suggest various other ideas through factors such as the
peculiar character of the speaker, or the person addressed, the sentence, the presence of
another person, the expressed meaning, the occasion, the place, the time, the intonation or
the gestures.

From the point of view of the vyanjakas or the indicators of suggestion the
different varieties of the type, samlaksyakrama-vyangya, could be subdivided into pada-
prakasya or revealed by a word and vakya-prakasya or revealed by the whole sentence.
The other type asamlaksyakrama-vyangya, is also classified as arising from individual
sounds, words or parts of words, sentences, stylistic structure or the whole poem.
Anandavardhana recognizes the importance of taking the whole stanza or even the poem
as a whole, in order that the overtones of the suggested sense are fully grasped.

Literariness.org Page 7
INTONATION

The importance of intonation as a factor in conveying the nuances of the natural

sentences of everyday speech was not unknown to the ancient Indian thinkers. In the
Natyasastra, Bharata refers to the different varieties of tone, tempo and pitch to be
employed by the actors to bring out the subtle meanings in their speeches. Bharata refers
to the two main types of kaku or intonation in a sentence: Sakanksa or the expectant and
Nirakanksha or the non-expectant. The former intonation shows that the meaning of the
sentence is not complete and requires something more to complete it, while the latter type
of intonation shows that the sense is complete. Rajasekhara deals with the problem of
intonation in speech in greater detail. He divides the expectant intonation into three sub-
varieties as suggesting (a) an objection or disapproval (akshepagarbha) (b) question
(prasnagarbha) and (c) doubt or uncertainty (vitarkagarbha). The non-expectant
intonation is also divided into three varieties: (a) denoting a statement (vidhirupa), (b)
giving an answer (uttararupa) and (c) asserting a decision (nirnayarupa). He defines
kaku or intonation as a quality in the mode of utterance, which brings out the intention of
the speaker clearly. With the change in intonation the same sentence can mean different
things--- a question, assertion or doubt. There are innumerable distinctions in intonation,
which suggest subtle shades of meaning, cognitive or emotive. Later Alamkarikas accept
intonation, as a means of suggesting meaning not actually expressed by words.
Intonation brings to light all manners of emotional attitude, irony, pathos,
argumentativeness, menace and so forth. More than one type of intonation may be
combined in different ways to indicate various emotional attitudes.

DHVANI IN LITERARY CRITICISM

Vyanjana is an important doctrine in the realm of literary appreciation. It is the

central principle of literary criticism in Sanskrit. Vanjana makes possible the synthesis
between literary law and literary liberty. Law in the sphere of poetic art reduces itself to
the numerous literary rules and liberty is to be understood as the principle that determines
the free play of the artist’s genius. A poem transcends the strict laws that bind it. It is
the artistic instinct of suppression that serves as the connecting link between the two
entirely distinct things, sabda and artha. Vyanjana establishes a sort of connection
between expression and impression, between the speaker and the hearer. If speech fulfills
its purpose, there ought to be some amount of suppression. Hence naturally thought is
wider than speech. This is true in the field of literary art. In the field of literary criticism
we accept that thought is always wider than form. If not, the world would have been
deprived of the pleasure of art. The synthesis of form and content is the greatest of our
achievements in the realm of art. This is achieved through the doctrine of vyanjana. It is
an essentially artistic process as it involves suppression not of the everyday type but of the
agreeable type. Through suppression we wish to create interest in the mind of the
hearers. There is scope for some intellectual quest in the process of vyanjana and this
leads to conquest. Vyanjana makes possible for every suggestive art to relive its life in
itself through a purely artistic process and to find its fulfillment and consummation in a
definitely artistic purpose. It enables us to do away with the compartmental slicing up of
literature into literary genera such as epic, lyric, the metrical, the non-metrical and so on,
and enables us to take the right view of poetic art and view it as an organic and complete
expression.

Literariness.org Page 8
THE INDEPENDENCE OF DHVANI

The existence of dhvani in poetry is undeniable and it has a status independent of

that of any other concept, with which it may be closely associated. It is not possible
either to dismiss the concept as of no consequence or explain it away by reducing it to
some other concept. Although the concept of dhvani was developed and explained in the
context of poetry, its application is possible in all fine arts. This possibility is indicated
by Anandavardhana’s reference to arts other than poetry. To show, for example, that
suggestiveness (vyanjakatva) is different from denotation (vacakatva) and implication
(laksana), Anandavardhana points out that, while the latter two are powers associated with
language alone vyanjakatva is a power that belongs to the non-linguistic forms of
communication also. The same argument is a reply to those who identify dhvani with
figures of speech (alamkara). While figures of speech are devices for linguistic
embellishments, the scope of dhvani is wider than that of language. For example, in
music even such sounds as are not words suggest bhava, and in dance gestures (which are
not even sounds) also suggest bhava. No one will say that these sounds and gestures
possess primary and secondary meanings or are embellished by figures of speech. And
yet, if they convey sentiments, it is only by the power of suggestion. Anandavardhana
foresaw that the method of dhvani is universal and is not confined to the literary art. The
nature of the process of suggestion is such that the means to it need not necessarily be
words. Sound, as in music, gestures as in drama and dance, lines and colours, as in
painting, and shapes and sizes as in architecture and sculpture, could also be suggestive of
sentiments and ideas.

Literariness.org Page 9