199 this: "You have become king in succession/3 and what is so special about that? Such a case of vyajastutz would be laughed out of any gathering of sensitive critics. So it only deserves to be ignored.-1-1' It is interesting that the one example Abhinava provides is a very bad poem, quite apart from its theme. Other examples of obscene verses come to mind — the famous yonir dravati nar^nam of the Mahdbharata (Nilakantha on III. 116.8). Less well-known, but even more interesting, are certain sections of the Prakrit anthology, the Vajjatagga (11). One or two of the verses, in sections that are meant to be sexually exciting, strike me as very fine. I think in particular of: The passionate woman, not having been fulfilled in her love-making, says upon seeing a cart in the middle of the village: Blessed, indeed, is the hub of the wheel in which is always stuck the axle.^ No debate existed in Sanskrit about these two categories; they were simply different. But there is an aspect to verses belonging to the first category over which controversy did exist. Not only in the anthologiesy1-5 but also in the great poems, verses describing the love-making of Siva and Parvati, or Visnu and Laksmi1' are commonly found. One thinks in particular of the eighth chapter of the great Kwnarasambhava (fifth century A.D.), where Kalidasa describes the sexual scenes between Siva and Parvati: Attached to his beloved, Siva made love both day and night. One hundred and fifty seasons passed like a single night. He never tired of sexual pleasures, as the fire hidden deep in the ocean never tires of its pouring waters «1-^ Or of the Janaklhawna of Kumaradasa, which contains a similar description, no doubt inspired by Kalidasa: They quarrelled. She pretended to be asleep. Then, as he carefully began to remove her dress, she laughed, called him a thief, and boldly bit his lower lip.l0 Now Siva and Parvati are said to be the mother and father of the universe (cf. RaghuvamSa I.I), and one naturally questions the "propriety" of describing one^ parentsT love life. The matter has been discussed some detail with great perception by Anandavardhana in the third uddyota of his Dhvanyaloka (17 ) . Here is my translation of this important section: Should you then ask how it is that sensitive readers nonetheless find beauty in such instances (i.e., where there are obvious stylistic faults), our reply is that this is because (the fault) is overshadowed (tiwhzta) by the imaginative genius of the poet (kaviSakti). For a poetic fault can be of two kindsl it can either be