Aesthetic Rapture. The Rasdhyya of the Nyastra by J. L. Masson; M. V.

Patwardhan
Review by: Kamaleswar Bhattacharya
Journal of the American Oriental Society, Vol. 98, No. 2 (Apr. - Jun., 1978), pp. 192-193
Published by: American Oriental Society
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/600999 .
Accessed: 08/06/2012 14:37

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

American Oriental Society is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal of
the American Oriental Society.

http://www.jstor.org
192 Journal of the American
opus, MahasubhOsitasamgraha, now being published by
the same V.V.R.I.-which will fulfil a great desideratum may be drawn, however, to some particular points:
and for which he is a most competent person.
PRATAPBANDYOPADHYAY between aesthetic experience and mystical experience,
UNIVERSITY OF BURDWAN
Aesthetic Rapture. The Rasadhyaya of the Natyasastra.
By J. L. MASSONand M. V. PATWARDHAN. Vol. I rasasvada, because the passages in which this was ex-
(Text), Pp. 57. Vol. II (Notes and Bibliography),
P. 102 Poona: DECCANCOLLEGEPOSTGRADUATE
RESEARCHINSTITUTE.1970.
Quite a number of books on early Indian poetic aes-
thetics have been written. But those which are at once
scholarly and readable are rare. The book under review
is one of these, and it is as remarkable as its predecessor,
Santarasa and Abhinavagupta's Philosophy of Aesthetics
(Poona: Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, 1969).
Mr. Masson explains in his Preface: "This book is
basically an attempt to salvage ideas buried away in
the corrupt and difficult text of the Abhinavabharati,
the commentary by Abhinavagupta on the sixth chapter
of the Natyasastra. This sudy of the Abhinavabharati
has in turn led to an enquiry into the idea of rasa in
its many ramifications."
The authors have fully succeeded in their enterprise.
In the first part of the first volume, under the general
heading Early Indian Ideas on the Nature of Beauty in
Literature, they deal with the topics: The N.tyasastra,
The Abhinavabharati, Abhinava's Teachers and His Debt
to Earlier Writers, The Poetic Universe, Rasa--"Imag-
inative Experiences," and The Real World and the World
of Drama. In the second part they give a translation of
the Rasidhyaya of the N.atyasastra, with translated ex-
cerpts from the Abhinavabhdrati in the Notes.
This simple enumeration of the contents will give an
idea of the wide range of subjects covered by the authors
in an apparently small book. All through their ex-
position and translation are lucid and elaborately an-
notated. 491 notes, all illuminating, occupy the bulk
of the second volume.
It is not possible here to do full justice to this out-
standing contribution. There is not a single important
idea of the Natyasastra, of Abhinavagupta, and of other
writers concerning the subject that has been neglected.
To enjoy the book one has to read it, and I am sure, like
poetry itself it can be read over and over again without
any boredom.
Innumerable passages from various texts have been
quoted, translated and explained. It is, therefore, under-
standable that some inaccuracies of translation and in-
terpretation have remained. There are also some mis-
prints, which can be easily detected. It is not possible,
Oriental Society 98.2 (1978)
in this brief review, to go over all these details. Attention
Speaking of the distinction that Abhinavagupta makes
the authors refer, in Note 263, to their book on Santarasa,
and they add: "One issue we did not deal with was pre-
cisely why Abhinava distinguishes yogipratyaksa from
plained remained obscure to us. However we feel that
AND we have now understood what Abhinava wishes to say:
Abhinava contrasts the aesthetic experience to a number
of other things. Among these is the ecstatic experience
of the highest Yogin in which he experiences the undif-
ferentiated bliss of his Self and in which all desire for
wordly objects is absent... Now in giving the reason
why this state is different from rasa . . . Abhinava writes:
visayavesavaivasyakrtasaundaryavirahat. Now we dissolve
this compound as follows: visayivesavaivasyena krtam
saundaryam tasya virahat, in other words, because of the
absence of beauty that comes from entrancement by
objects. Abhinava's point is that there can be no saun-
darya where there are no objects...". The authors
adopt here a point of view which I also expressed in my
review article of their book on Santarasa ("gantarasa et
Advaita," Journal Asiatique, 1972, pp. 89-105; cf. on
this point p. 103). But, while their understanding of
this passage of the Abhinavabharati is basically correct
(and this, I should note, is true of the majority of the
cases in which I have seen some inaccuracy of transla-
tion), the literal interpretation they give of it is definitely
wrong-as the context shows: sa ca [carvana] pratyaksa-
numanagamopamanddilaukikapramanajanitaratyadyavab-
odhatas tatha yogipratyaksajatataasthaparasamvittijinant
sakalavaisayikoparagaasnyasuddhaparayogigatasvanandai-
kaghananubhavac ca visisyate, etesiam yathayogam arjana-
divighnantarodayat atasthyasphut atvavisayivesavaivasyakr
tasaundaryavirahat. The idea, evidently, is that the
experience of the highest Yogin is devoid of beauty
because of the absence of liberty (vaivasya) which is due
to the fact that the subject is completely absorbed in
the object (the proper analysis of the compound would
be: visayavesavaivasyena krtah saundaryavirahah, tasmat).
Note 220: dhigama in the Lankavatara passage does
not stand for dhigama, as the authors suggest, but for
adhigama (cf. Edgerton, Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit Dic-
tionary, s.v., and Grammar, ? 4.7).
It may also be noted, in this connection, that the verse:
citram vatataror mule ... (Note 221) is well known. It
is quoted, as from the Daksinamuortistotra, by VidhuSekha-
ra Bhattacarya in Gaudapidiyan Agamagsstram (in San-
skrit: University of Calcutta, 1950), p. 200.
The translation of v. 11 of the Rasidhyaya is not quite
accurate. But it can be easily corrected. More important
 Reviews
is the problem concerning vv. 12-13, about which the
authors say (Note 352): "We are not certain of our
translation of these two verses. Is there any difference
between dhatvarthavacanena in verse 13, and dhatvartha-
hetusamyuktam in verse 12?"-The idea is that nirukta
is not a "technical" designation but one that is based on
the meaning of the verbal root from which it is derived;
in other words, its application accords with its etymolog-
ical meaning-as Abhinava states at the very beginning
of his comment on these two verses: na caivam paribhsai
kim tv anvartham etat. nirbhajyaiksepapratisamadh&nab- of V. I. Kalyanov. Van Buitenen has qualified praise
hyrm laksanasya vacanam iti. etad Oha: dhatvarthava-
caneneti (thus I read the text).
I do not understand what is translated, in v. 13, by
"the meaning (of a particular word), which (in turn)
throws light on the meaning (of the whole sentence)."
If this is the translation of samasenarthasucakah, then it
is wrong. By samasena is meant samksepena (cf. Abhinava-
gupta: samasena samksepenanekavyaktibhedabhinnasyar-
thasya laksaniyasya yah sicako 'rtho laksanaitmakah ...).
Mr. Masson is to be congratulated upon this unique
performance. I would like to record here that he has
also written, either alone or with Patwardhan, a number
of significant articles on the subject in different journals, of familiarity with the Mahabharata is bound to exclaim
Indian and Western. Those which I have liked most are:
"Abhinavagupta as a Poet" (JOI, 1970); "Philosophy
and Literary Criticism in Ancient India" (J. of Indian
Philosophy, Dordrecht, 1971); "Solution to a long-confused
Issue in the Dhvanyaloka" (JOI, 1972); "Did Dharma-
kirti write the Kfrikas of the Alankairasekhara?" (Indo-
Ir. J., 1972); "'Telling, Not Conveying'--Svasabdava-
cya" (J. of Indian Philosophy, 1973). All these articles, like Jacobi's Mahabharata, etc. Van Buitenen's "Apparatus"
his books, combine accurate scholarship with deep insight;
and I fully share his views on Sanskrit poetry and poetics.
KAMALESWAR BHATTACHARYA each story and subsidiary story within the epic as a
CENTRE NATIONAL DE LA RECHERCHE
SCIENTIFIQUE, PARIS.
The Mahabharata. Translated and Edited by J. A. B.
VANBUITENEN.Volume 1: The Book of the Beginning.
Pp. xlix + 492. Volume 2: The Book of the Assembly
Hall. The Book of the Forest. Pp. xi + 864. Chicago-
London: THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO PRESS.
1973,
1975.
This is a belated presentation of volume one and a more
timely one of volume two of a seven volume translation
of the Mahabharata, by Professor van Buitenen of the
University of Chicago. Most sanskritists-indologists have
been aware for some time of van Buitenen's preoccupation
with the Mahabharata. Many have asked themselves
questions: why a new translation of the Mahabharata?
why did van Buitenen undertake it? The reasons for
of Books 193
and motives behind this enormous and unique enterprise
are legion, as is clear from the Preface and Introduction
to volume one.
There have been-partial and complete-translations
of the Mahabharata in the past: into French by Hippolyte
Fauche (1863-70), and into English by-or at least with
the strong support of (2.x-xi)-P. C. Roy (1883-96) and
by Manmatha N. Dutt (1895-1905). At least two are
in progress at this moment: a poeticized rendering by
P. Lal, and a Russian translation under the supervision
for all of these (1. xxxvi-xxxvii), but is obviously not
wholly satisfied with any of them. No one who has had
occasion to use the earlier translations will disagree with
him on that score. Besides, the recent completion of the
critical edition at the Bhandarkar Oriental Research In-
stitute at Poona has given us the impression that we
finally possess on our library shelves, if not a perfect and
definitive edition, at least "the best attainable" (1. xxx)
one. It was obvious that, one day, the best attainable
text of the Mahabharata should be provided with the
best attainable English translation.
Even the sanskritist who has acquired some degree
sooner or later, with Murray Emeneau: "In any shape
and form the Mahabharata is intractable!" (1. xxxviii).
Van Buitenen acknowledges that his decision to produce
this translation was, in fact, inspired by "my own sense
of inadequacy in controlling the epic" (1. xxxv). To be
sure, important tools to control the Mahabharata do
exist: Sorensen's Index to the Names of the MahObharata,
(1. xlii), if read carefully before consulting the "Contents"
of each Book, should go far to help the reader situate
whole. For instance, the "Contents" (1. 17) make it
immediately clear that the story of gakuntala, chapters
62-69, is the second of four episodes within the seventh
"Minor Book" of "Major Book" one. Before its transla-
tion (in casu, 1. 155-6) the reader is given a summary of
the story, chapter by chapter, with a cross-reference to
the Bombay and Calcutta editions.
Finally, "the importance of The Mahabharata for our
knowledge of Indian civilization and the paucity of
knowledge about it in the West persuaded me to go
ahead" (1. xi). Even though sanskritists will be among
those to make use of van Buitenen's translation, his main
purpose is "to open up the vast literature of The Maha-
bharata to anyone interested in India, in the widest sense,
who has neither the skill nor the leisure to go directly
to the Sanskrit" (1. xxxvii-xxxviii). Making the Mahabha-
rata more easily accessible to non-sanskritists is un-
doubtedly the main objective of the translation.