Academia.eduAcademia.edu

Outline

DHVANYÂLOKA LOCANA : KERALA COMMENTARIES, Vols. I and II

Adyar Library Bulletin (Brahmavidya) ( Vol. 76-77)

Abstract

Review of the work DHVANYALOKALOCANA : KERALA COMMENTARIES, Centre for Heritage Studies, Trippunithura, Kerala.

REVIEWS 297 DHVANYÂLOKA LOCANA : KERALA COMMENTARIES, Vols. I and II, edited by C.M. NEELAKANDHAN, Centre for Heritage Studies, Kochi, 2011. Pages 876. Price ì 1000. This is a new edition of the text with the Locana commentary contains four sub-commentaries on the Locana, two of which are brought out for the first time. As is well known, Dhvanyâloka is an epoch-making work in the field of literary criticism in Sanskrit. Ânanda- vardhana establishes the fact that, in a good literary piece of work, there is a function, other than the denotative and metaphorical function of word, called vyañjanâ for convey- ing the emotive aspect. It is this emotive aspect which is the essence of a literary work, he proclaimed. This he did with a philosophical and linguistic perspective, which made his work very popular in the field of literary criticism in India. The success of the work was so powerful that the work eclipsed almost all the earlier works. In bringing such a wide popularity and acceptance for the work, Abhinavagupta (11th century), the commentator has played a decisive role. The influence exercised by his extensive commentary, Locana, is so strong that tradition believed that the original work is incomplete without the commentary. Many editions, translations and studies on Dhvanyâloka and Locana have come out. The present edition is justified by the inclusion of two Sanskrit commentaries on the Locana by authors probably belonging to Kerala. The first one of these is the Añjana commentary. The editors inform us that nothing is known about its date and authorship. The other one is a work authored by Dâºarathi Namp»tiri. The name of this commentary (given by the author) is not 298 THE ADYAR LIBRARY BULLETIN 2012-13 known. It is generally held that Dâºarathi lived in the 16th century state the editors. It may be noted that both these commentaries extend only up to the end of the first Udyota of Dhvanyâloka. The editors inform us that Mrs. Khadeeja P.P. has established, against the view of scholars like K. Krishna- murthy, K. Kunjunni Raja and S. Venkatasubramonia Iyer, that these two commentaries are distinct. Apart from these two new commentaries, the present edition contains two other commentaries. They are the well- known Bâlapriyâ of K. Râmapi™âro˜i (1867-1947) and the Kaumudï of King Udaya (15th century). Bâlapriyâ was first published in 1940 through Kasi Sanskrit Series. This edition contained Dhvanyâloka and Locana besides Bâlapriyâ. In the present edition all these three texts are simply reproduced as such from the Kasi edition. The only difference being that in the present edition the Divyâñjana ˆippašï (short explanatory notes on the Locana, said to be authored by Mahâdeva ªâstrïn) is attached at the end of the text instead of giving as foot note. The Kaumudï commentary was first published by Mahamahopadhyaya Kuppuswami Sastri in 1944 from the Kuppuswami Sastri Research Institute (KSRI), Madras. The edition also contained a ˆippašï called Upalocana (authored by the editor himself). Sastri’s edition of the Kaumudï is, again, reproduced as such (along with the Upalocana) in the present edition. It may be noted that this commentary also extends only up to the end of the first Udyota of the Dhvanyâloka. Among the four commentaries on Dhvanyâloka REVIEWS 299 Locana, the Bâlapriyâ alone, is available for the full text of Locana commentary. All the three others, extend only up to the end of the first Udyota of Dhvanyâloka. Hence the present edition is designed in two volumes. The first volume contains all the four sub-commentaries on the Locana, along with the texts of Dhvanyâloka and Locana, for the first Udyota. The second volume contains the Bâlapriyâ, and the Locana, for the remaining three Udyota-s of the Dhvanyâloka (of course, along with the original text). The editors deserve appreciation for making available, for the scholarly world, the two new Sanskrit commentaries on the Locana. Further, they have facilitated reading of the Locana with the four sub-commentaries on it in a single book. As regards the reproduction of the Bâlapriyâ and the Kaumudï editor’s contribution is nothing but some typo- graphical errors. As has already been noted, both the ˆippašï-s are separated from the text and given at the end. The quotations in the original text Dhvanyâloka as well as the Locana commentary and the sub-commentaries have been given in separate indices. Here again the editors have simply copied the indices from the Kasi and KSRI editions. An index given for the new sub-commentaries, namely the Añjana and the commentary of Dâºarathi. It may be noted that the editors have not taken proper care in the preparation of all the indices, especially in the second volume. One may not find the passages in the pages given in the index in many a case. And many quotations have been left out. In the ‘Introduction’ to the first volume, the editor gives 300 THE ADYAR LIBRARY BULLETIN 2012-13 some information regarding the sub-commentaries on the Locana, their authors, previous editions of the texts and some details regarding the manuscripts. Here two points are noteworthy. The first one is a slight oversight ; but in effect it amounts to a dishonour to a traditional scholar. The other one is a pointer to a fact hitherto unnoticed regarding the authorship of Divyâñjana ˆippašï. But due to negligence, the editor fails to note the finding. In the Introduction, it is stated : ‘It is recorded that in the beginning the great scholar ªrï Cinnasvâmi ºâstrï [sic] was requested to give all help and scholarly advices in the editing of the work. But due to various reasons he could not do it’. He has misunderstood the words of Pa˜˜âbhirâma ºâstrï, the editor of Kasi edition of Bâlapriyâ. What Pa˜˜âbhirâmaºâstrï clearly states in his editorial note is this : ‘The text of Bâlapriyâ (older Nirnayasagar edition) was procured by Jayakrishna Das Gupta from Cinnasvâmi ºâstrï, the great scholar of Mïmâ›sâ. Having procured the same, he entrusted somebody for a better edition of the same. But not satisfied with his editorial work, he took back the work from that person and assigned the work afresh to Pa˜˜âbhirâmaºâstrï.’ The editor rightly points out that the name of the author of the Divyâñjana ˆippašï as given in the title page of the Kasi edition is different from the one given in the beginning of the text (in the same edition). In the title pages (both in English and Sanskrit) it is given as ‘Pašœit ªrï Mahâdeva ªâstrï’. But in the beginning of the text, it is given as ‘Gosvâmi ªrï Dâmodara ªâstrï’. The editor presumes that this is a typographical error and changes the reading of the above passage as ºrïmahâ- REVIEWS 301 deva-ºâstri-nirmitayâ in place of gosvâmi-ºrïdâmodara- ºâstri-nirmitayâ. It seems that the Divyâñjana ˆippašï, which is given in the body of the text in the Kasi edition is different from the expository note written by Mahâdeva ªâstrï. There are two valid reasons for this presumption. (1) In the beginning of the text, the ˆippašï is included in the body of the text. From the 16th page onwards this ˆippašï is not seen. Instead some expository notes are given as foot note. (2) This foot note (no.1) is prefaced with an introduc- tory passage such as ‘ita ârabhya sâhitya-vyâkarašâcâryaið pa. (pašœita) mahâdeva-ºâstri-pâšdeyair viracitâ ˜ippašï/ pa. (pašœita) pa˜˜âbhirâma-ºâstrišâ viracita› vivaraša› ca prakâºyate’. Here it is stated that from this point only the expository notes of Mahâdeva ªâstrï commence. Hence it is clear that ˆippašï given thus far is entirely different. It is to be noticed further that the editor calls the expository notes of Mahâdeva ªâstrï simply as ˆippašï. He does not designate it. Hence it seems that the Divyâñjana ˆippašï is a different commentary, expository notes on Locana is authored by somebody else. The author clearly states that it is an exposition on Locana. The author pays obeisance to Gaurak·™ša in the benedictory verse. Even prior to this, there is a sentence, again saluting Gaurak·™ša. Gaurak·™ša is Caitanya Mahâ- prabhu, the great Vai™šavite saint devotee cum philoso- pher. This fact takes us to a Gosvâmi Dâmodara ºâstrï (1875-1948), who was a Vai™šavite saint belonging to the 302 THE ADYAR LIBRARY BULLETIN 2012-13 school of Caitanya mahâprabhu and who has authored many commendable ˆïkâ-s on many celebrated works on Bhakti school of philosophy like Bhagavannâmakumudï, Bhaga- vadbhaktirasâyana and Haribhaktirasâm·tasindhu. He is known to have edited works like Vâkyapadïya and aœ- darºanasamuccaya. He is said to have mastered Vyâka- raša and Sâhitya besides the Bhakti philosophy of the Vai™šava school. Pt. Baladev Upadhyay gives more details about the personal details of Gosvâmi Dâmodara ºâstrï in his Hindi work named Kâshì Kï Pâšœitya Paramparâ (Vishva Vidyâlay Prakashan, Varanasi, 1983). Upadhyay gives his name as Gosvâmi Dâmodara Lala ªâstrï. This Gosvâmi Dâmodara ºâstrï is likely to be the author of Divyâñjana ˆippašï, though we cannot come to a definite conclusion. Moreover attempts are to be made to retrieve the remaining portions of the ˆippašï. However, the present edition would definitely be happily welcomed by the scholarly world since it brings out two hitherto unpublished commentaries on the Locana commentary. N. K. SUNDARESWARAN