Kuntaka’s evaluation of Sanskrit literature
by Nikitha. M | 2018 | 72,578 words
This page relates ‘Review of literature’ of the study on the evaluation of Sanskrit literature with special reference to Kuntaka and his Vakroktijivitam from the 10th century CE. This study reveals the relevance of Sanskrit poetics in the present time and also affirms that English poetry bears striking features like six figurativeness taught by Kuntaka in his Vakroktijivita, in which he propounds the vakrokti school of Sanskrit literary criticism.
Review of literature
Nothing much was known about the epoch making work named Vakroktijīvita until 1923, when S. K. De, a renowned scholar of Indian poetics had published the first two chapters of this text. He published that fragmentary portion with the help of two original incomplete transcript obtained from Madras govt. manuscripts library. K Krishnamoorthy opines that a lost Malayalam manuscript was the original source of Madras manuscripts. In the same year, another famous scholar of Indian poetics named P.V Kane also published a text depending on the two incomplete manuscripts and the published work of S. K. De. In 1928 De published a revised new edition of the text including the third chapter with the help of another manuscript obtained from Jain Bhandars at Jaisalmer. Then after twenty seven years i.e. in 1955 another edition of Vakroktijīvita with four unmeṣas has been published by one Dr. Nagendra of Delhi university with Hindi commentary of Acharya Viśveśvar. Then in 1967, Raddhe Shyam Mishra published a text in Chowkhamba Sanskrit series with Hindi translation and a commentary named Prakāśa. This was mere replica of the text published by De. Then in 1977 with great difficulty K. Krishnamoorthy, professor of Karnataka University published four unmeṣas of Vakroktijīvita with the help of manuscripts and paper scripts of Madras manuscripts library and also with a text named Kalpalataviveka of an unknown authorship. Then in 2009, Chattanatt Acyutanunni, former Professor of Malayalam department of Calicut University published a Malayalam translation of the text depending on the text of K. Krishnamoorthy. These were the milestones in the history of the publication of the text Vakroktijīvita. Absence of strong commentaries and its incompleteness never reduce the relevance of a text. As Krishnamoorthy said it is sure that the text is almost completed. The effort taken by all these scholars are highly appreciable otherwise an epoch making work of Sanskrit poetics must be in oblivion.
The present thesis focuses on the literary analysis of Kuntaka. K. Krishnamoorthy and Chattanatt Acyutanunni in their texts explicitly stated the name of the text of the verses cited by Kuntaka. This is really helpful in finding out the names of literary texts quoted by Kuntaka. Among these texts, some of them are now lost and some verses are anonymous. This makes the study of lost works more crucial. The huge composition named Indian kāvya literature of A.K Warder also helps to find out brief information about some rare works like Puṣpadūṣitaka, Hayagrīvavadha etc. Some old lost Rāma plays edited by Dr. V. Raghavan help to trace out some information about some lost dramas like Māyāpuṣpaka, Kṛtyārāvaṇa, Abhijñānajānaki, Chalitarāma etc. Moreover brief information about the text named Udāttarāghava is availed from “Rāmakatha”.[1]
Kuntaka has taken examples from the anthologies like Subhāṣitāvalī, Sūktimuktāvalī, Śārṅgadharapaddhati etc. and also from some śatakas like Sūryaśataka, Amarukaśataka etc. Moreover there are fifteen Prakrit verses in his text. The anthologies are really a store house of stray verses. The anthologies mentioned below really help to ascertain the verses indicated by K. Krishnamoorthy. The anthologies are Saduktikarṇāmṛta of Śrīdharadāsa[2], Śārṅgadharapaddhati compiled by Śārṅgadara[3], Vallabhadeva’s Subhāṣitāvalī[4] and Subhāṣitaratnakośa of Vidyākara[5].
Dr. C. Rajendran’s monograph titled Kuntaka is also a good reference for further study. This book contains four chapters. The first chapter named Kuntaka and his magnum opus gives a clear picture of Kuntaka and brief structure of the text Vakroktijīvita and also the names of the literary texts cited by Kuntaka. In the next chapter on poets and poetry, the viewpoint of Kuntaka on the combination of word and sense, qualities, styles etc. The third chapter named Vakrokti-the poetic art gives a clear picture of six types of figurativeness propounded by Kuntaka with illustration. The last chapter named a critical evaluation gives a picture of Kuntaka as a literary critic mainly focusing on the works of Kālidāsa.
The article named ‘Subhāṣita-saṅgrahas and inscriptions as source of poetry’ of Ludwik Sternbach help to attain information about the anthologies of Sanskrit literature. He had given the name of twenty different anthologies. He had also given a detailed study of the relevance of the anthologies and inscription in the field of Sanskrit poetry. Yet another articles named ‘Ānandavardhana, Dhanika and Kuntaka on the Abijñānaśākuntala’ in Studies in Sāṃskrit Sāhitya-Śāstra of V.M. Kulkarni.[6] This article gave a brief analysis of the context and verses of Abijñānaśākuntala cited by Kuntaka. Some other articles in the same book named ‘some aspects of Prakrit verses in Alaṅkāra works’ and ‘The Harivijaya of Sarvasena’ helped as a good reference material for the present thesis. Some other papers which rendered information are- Kālidāsa-an assessment by Kuntaka[7], Variant Readings of Kālidāsa’s verses in Kuntaka’s Vakroktijīvita[8], A Reference to the Mahānāṭaka[9], Vakrokti vaibhavam of Archanakumaridube etc.[10]
Some of the thesis works written based on Vakroktijīvita are as follows-‘A Study of Stylistics in Sanskrit Poetics with special references to Kuntaka’ written by T. Vasudevan. The effort he had taken is explicit in this stunning research work. The first chapter named the stylistic approaches to literary language introduces some of the important sources and methods of modern stylistics mainly in their linguistic and literary perspectives so as to serve as a background for the interpretation of stylistic thought in Sanskrit. The aim of the second chapter is a general analysis of certain areas in Sanskrit poetics which are agreeable to the western stylistic concepts. The third chapter is an analytical outline of Vakroktijīvita. Next chapter is a comparison of some western concepts of stylistics with some of the stylistics concepts of Kuntaka and other Sanskrit poeticians. Fifth chapter is a comparative study of the phonological, lexical and syntactic aspects of poetic languages as conceived by some of the western stylisticians with the corresponding levels of figurativeness mentioned by Kuntaka. Sixth chapter is a brief analysis of the general nature of figurative expressions, metaphorical transfer and a number of rhetorical figures like simile, metaphor and paradox as conceived by the modern stylisticians and Sanskrit poeticians. The final chapter examines various aspects of discourse analysis and narratology which seem more or less relevant in the study of Sanskrit stylistics as found in Kuntaka.
Another research work based on Vakroktijīvita is ‘Kuntaka a critical study’ submitted by Suchitra Mandal in 1990. Its first chapter discusses the various concepts of poetry prevalent in the treatise of different rhetoricians prior to Kuntaka. Second chapter is a comprehensive evolution of the idea of vakrokti as noticed by early rhetoricians preceding Kuntaka. The third chapter is an estimate of rīti concept as treated by the early propagators of rīti and Kuntaka’s novelty of perusal in this respect. Forth chapter deals mainly with Kuntaka’s concept of some figurativeness. The final chapter is a precise exhibition of various contributions made by Kuntaka in the field of literary criticism in Sanskrit.
Other theses from the Department of Sanskrit, Karnataka University, Dharwar is ‘Kuntaka’s contribution to Sanskrit poetics’ of Shikaripura Krishnamurthy submitted in 1985. This thesis is divided into four parts. First part gives an introduction to Kuntaka and his text. Second part is a brief summary of Vakroktijīvita covering the complete contents of the four unmeṣas. A critical estimate of Vakroktijīvita is given in the third part. Here Kuntaka’s concept of vakrokti in relation with various poetic concepts like guṇa, rīti, alaṅkāra etc. are analyzed. Fourth part presents the conclusion of the present thesis and also tries to judge Kuntaka as a critic. Another thesis from the same university is ‘Ānandavardhana and Kuntaka a comparative study’ submitted by Hemalatha B. Deshpande in 1967. First chapter is an analysis of the concept of bhakti of various Sanskrit rhetoricians. Second chapter is a historical analysis of alaṅkārya and alaṅkāra in kāvya. The forgoing chapters respectively discusses about rīti, guṇa, rasa and comparison of dhvani and vakrokti. Final chapter is an analysis of the practical criticism of Dhvanyāloka and Vakroktijīvita.
Yet another thesis is ‘The concept of Vakrokti in Sanskrit PoeticsA Critical survey’ submitted by Sri Suryanarayana in 2006. The first chapter of this thesis presents major schools of Sanskrit poetics, general definition of vakrokti and its multi-dimensional implications. Second chapter describes the view of different theorists on Vakrokti. The third chapter exposes Kuntaka’s theory of vakrokti. The fourth chapter is an analysis of vakrokti in relation to various literary concepts like mārga, rasa etc. The fifth chapter focuses on the striking similarities between dhvani and vakrokti perspectives. Final chapter is brief analysis of fundamental aspects of practical criticism as showed by Kuntaka.
There is a post-doctoral dissertation on Vakroktijīvita named as ‘Kuntaka’s vakrokti siddhānta: towards an appreciation of English Poetry’ by Shravan K Sharma, professor of Department of English, Gurukula Kangri University, Haridwar. This was published in 2004 by Shalabh Publishing house, Meerut. It is divided in to eight chapters. First chapter gives a brief analysis of the term vakrokti in the view of Sanskrit rhetoricians. The final chapter is a conclusion. The six chapters in between them discuss the various sub varieties of six figurativeness of Kuntaka as conceived in the poems of western poets like Wordsworth, Shelly, W. H. Auden, Keats, T.S. Eliot etc. This study reveals the relevance of Sanskrit poetics in the present time and also affirms that English poetry also bears striking features like six figurativeness propounded by Kuntaka.
Footnotes and references:
[2]:
[3]:
Peterson, Petor. (Ed.). Śārṅgadharapaddhati. Chaukhamba Sanskrit Pratishthan, Delhi, 1987.
[4]:
Peter Peterson (Ed.). Vallabhadeva’s Subhāṣitāvalī, Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, Poona, 1961.
[5]:
D.D. Kosambi and V.V. Gokhale (Ed.). Subhāṣitaratnakośa of Vidyākara, Cambridge, Massachusetts, Harvard University Press, 1957.
[7]:
Rajendran,C. Pratyabhijñā. Vol. II, Issue. 1-2, Jan-Dec 2015.pp.63-69.
[8]:
Shanbhag, D.N. Centenary Commemoration Volume, Vol.XVI. Oriental Research Institute, Mysore,1992.pp-20-24.
[9]:
De, S.K . Jhā Commemoration Volume, Poona Oriental Series No.39, Oriental Book agency, Poona, 1937.