Vyaktiviveka of Rajanaka Mahimabhatta Critically Edited with English Translation and Notes

Email

Whatsapp

Facebook

Pinterest

Twitter

Copy link

Vyaktiviveka of Rajanaka Mahimabhatța happens to be one of the most different texts in Indian Aesthetics. the controversy between Intellect and Emotion has been a long-standing controversy and it had started operating practically in the morning of mankind, when the man experienced his urge to cross from the land of Untruth to the land of Truth, - from the arena of Darkness to the arena of Light, - from the corridor of Mortality to the corridor of Immortality. This controversy, therefore, is as old as the controversy between existence and non-existence of the Divine Being, - or between Materialism and Spirituality. It is a well-known fact that, while theists believe in the existence of all-powerful God and consequently in the benign nature of the operative rules of the universe, the atheists deny the existence of the omniscient and omnipotent God and assert that the order of the universe has no beneficial elements in it. In a similar manner, in the field of Indian Aesthetics, Anandavardhana holds that the Function of Suggestion is of paramount importance in the specimen of Poetry and that the soul of Poetry is represented by the suggested emotional mood, the experience of which enables the connoisseur to taste the ambrosia of bliss associated with the Infinite. In sharp contradiction to it, Mahimabhațţa states that the Function of Suggestion is a figment of imagination, and consequently it has no role to play in appreciation of Poetry. Mahimabhațța expresses the opinion that so-called symbolic content of Poetry is capable of being comprehended through the process of Inference and consequently the suggested meaning is nothing other than the inferred content.

In the long list of the works on Sanskrit poetics, Vyaktiviveka of Rajanaka Mahimabhatta holds a highly prestigious position. The author had the purpose behind the composition of the work to demolish the theory of dhvani propounded by the Dhvanikara who appeared two or three centuries earlier. The very name of Vyaktiviveka implies that in it the theory of vyakti or vyanjana established in the Dhuanyaloka has been thoroughly considered. The work, according to Dr. S. K. De, is "undoubtedly a masterpiece of scholastic argumentation, exhibiting much fastidious criticism and great learning of a miscellaneous kind." So far as I know, no complete and satisfactory translation of the Vyaktiviveka has been attempted at by any one belonging to our scholarly world.

Prof. Ramaranjan Mukherji a brilliant star on the Sanskrit poetic firmament and the instrument in introducing DSA (Sanskrit) to Jadavpur University, has kindly presented us with this ornamental translation with an elaborate exposition of the fine product of the scholastic age. The members of the DSA (Sanskrit) of Jadavpur University cannot but express deep gratitude and high regard for Prof. Mukherji. Thanks are due to Sri Debashis Bhattacharjee of Sanskrit Pustak Bhandar and Sri Mithu Rakshit of Sanskrit Sahitya Parishat for their full co- operation in bringing out this book.

After refuting the contentions of the critics, who like to equate vyanjana with the figures of speech or with laksana and who declare it as something undefinable, the learned dhvanikara takes up the proposition of those, who want to comprehend dhvani under the process of inference. The advocates of this theory maintain that a suggestive unit is only an indicative one, and the relation existing between a suggestive unit and a suggested idea is exactly that, which connects an indicator and an indicated. The relation of indicator and indicated, as is evident in the stock illustration of anumana parvato vahniman dhurmat exists between a probans and a probandum, also, inasmuch as, smoke indicates the existence of fire on the hill. For this reason, these critics argue that the relation, linking a suggestor and a suggested is that, which connects a probans and a probandum, or in other words, vyanjana is identical with anumana. In support of their contention these critics quote the remarks of the dhvanikara himself, who in course of rejecting the view-point of the Mimamsakas says that, the intention of the speaker is brought into light solely through the function suggestion; these opponents point out that, as the intentions of others are capable of being comprehended through the process of inference alone, so the proposition established by the dhvanikara itself goes to equate vyanjana with anumana.

**Contents and Sample Pages**