Pranam and welcome KR

On Sat, 14 Jan 2023 at 18:38, Markendeya Yeddanapudi <
[email protected]> wrote:

> Rajaram Sir,
> What a wonderful and mighty phenomenon you are!
> My God,there is just no end to the flow of lessons,and contemplation
> triggers from you.I salute you.
> YM
>
> On Sun, Jan 15, 2023 at 6:17 AM Rajaram Krishnamurthy <
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
>> VEDANTA DESIKAN ON KALIDASAN AND HIS HAMSA SANDESAM
>>
>>       A few days back I wrote about Hamsa sandesa of the Vedanrtha
>> desikan. The desikan wrote the status of Sita and Rama in the journey of an
>> Hamsa. The idea for him arose out of Mega santhesam of Kalidasa. The
>> ignorant always speak of copy and paste as , originality is copying and
>> pasting gossips. But, as I used to say, everything had been written
>> already. There is no and there cannot be any originality, even if he were
>> to write his own life story. Every TV serial is nothing but the reflections
>> of the Ramayanam and Mahabharatham only. A research professor has written
>> the book, and I have extracted a passage where vedantha desikan is compared
>> to Kalidasan.
>>
>> I have been trying to understand why Vedantadesika, a writer who is first
>> and foremost a religious thinker, would be as invested as he is in the
>> poetry of Kalidasa, a poet who shows little interest in theology or
>> religious sentiments. In section 1, I identified which aspects of
>> Kalidasa’s poetry were most often taken up by Vedantadesika: surveying the
>> references to Kalidasa scattered throughout his oeuvre, I argued that
>> Vedantadesika isn’t primarily drawn to any viewpoint or “message” of
>> Kalidasa but to pre-propositional fragments in Kalidasa’s poetry—fragments
>> on the order of expressions, images, and metaphors—and more generally to
>> the capacity of Kalidasa’s writing to conjure vivid sensations. However, it
>> still wasn’t clear why Vedantadesika should be fascinated by this aspect of
>> Kalidasa’s poetry. In reading Vedantadesika’s texts on devotional
>> meditation (section 2) alongside Kalidasa’s depictions of daydreaming
>> (section 3), certain thematic connections between the two writers have
>> begun to emerge, which might be summed up as follows:
>>
>> (1) both Kalidasa and Vedantadesika are interested in the imagination’s
>> potential to conjure a world whose reality rivals that of the everyday
>> world; (2) both writers see the imagination reaching this potential in
>> extreme states of mind, such as lovesickness; (3) both identify the
>> imagination thus intensified as one of the sources of artistic creation.
>> That these are facts born of our observation doesn’t make them any less
>> true; however, their use as data for understanding Vedantadesika’s
>> investment in Kalidasa would be more convincing if we could somehow confirm
>> that Vedantadesika also saw them. We find such confirmation in the 
>> *Haṃsasandeśa
>> *(“Message of the Goose”), where Vedantadesika’s interest in Kalidasa
>> most visibly intersects with his religious thinking. For in this poem,
>> Vedantadesika casts his reflections on devotional meditation into
>> depictions of daydreaming similar to the ones we find in the *Meghadūta*.
>> In what follows, I will be interested in what these depictions can tell us
>> about Vedantadesika’s relation to Kalidasa.
>>
>> In both the *Haṃsasandeśa *and the *Meghadūta*, as in so many works of
>> messenger poetry, we meet characters who are engaged in various imaginative
>> exercises intended to make absent beloveds seem present. Late in the
>> *Meghādūta*, for example, in a speech occurring entirely within the
>> yaksha’s imagination, the cloud reports to the yaksha’s beloved one of the
>> techniques by which the yaksha has simulated reuniting with her:
>>
>> “He enters (*viś*) your body with his:
>>
>> yours so thin and thin his,
>>
>> his too hot and hot yours,
>>
>> his welling with tears as you shed tears,
>>
>> yours ever longing just as his longs,
>>
>> yours releasing hot sighs and his even more sighs.”
>>
>>    With these imaginings does your distant lover
>>
>> enter your body, his path blocked by cruel fate.   214
>>
>>       In the *Haṃsasandeśa*’s companion to this verse, Vedantadesika has
>> Rama similarly “enter” (*nirviś*) Sita by a technique of the imagination:
>>
>> “Seeing that our bodies touch in the southern wind,
>>
>> our gazes unite (*dṛṣṭi-saṃyoga*) in the moon,
>>
>> we have one home in the world,
>>
>> on the earth we are joined in a single bed,
>>
>> we have the expanse of a beautiful canopy
>>
>> in the sky decorated with stars,
>>
>> O most beautiful one, I reach (or “delight in”; *nirviś*) you
>>
>> who have become distant.”       215
>>
>> In both verses, the physical sense of entering another’s body is
>> prohibited by the distance separating the two pairs, for just as the cloud
>> refers to the yaksha as *dūravartin *(“one who is distant”), Sita is
>> described as *dūrībhūtā *(“one who has become distant”). “Entering” must
>> therefore take on another sense, which Rama and the yaksha arrive at in
>> different ways. The yaksha enters his lover by supposing her body to host
>> the same emotional responses as his, as though the two were connected in a
>> mystical sympathy. For instance, when he cries, he supposes that his tears
>> are an instinctive response to those shed by his distant beloved; or when
>> he sighs, he supposes that each sigh is unconsciously repeated in her. Such
>> mutual responsiveness is premised on the idea that to love someone is to
>> take on her inner life, so that “entering” comes to mean something like
>>
>>    214 aṅgenāṅgaṃ pratanu tanunā gāḍhataptena taptaṃ
>>
>> sāsreṇāśrudrutam aviratotkaṇṭham utkaṇṭhitena |
>>
>> uṣṇocchvāsaṃ samadhikatarocchvāsinā dūravartī
>>
>> saṅkalpais tair viśati vidhinā vairiṇā ruddhamārgaḥ || *MD *2.42 ||
>>
>>    215 dehasparśam malayapavane drṣṭisaṃbhedam indau
>>
>> dhāmaikatvam jagati bhuvi cābhinnaparyaṅkayogam |
>>
>> tārācitre viyati vitatiṃ śrīvitānasya paśyan
>>
>> dūribhūtām sutanu vidhinā tvām aham nirviśāmi || *H *2.40 ||
>>
>>      “accessing another’s mind.” In Vedantadesika’s poem, Rama still
>> enters Sita in a way, but by means of a different movement of the
>> imagination: he expands the meaning of the words “touch,” “contact,”
>> “home,” “bed,” and “canopy” (*sparśa*, *saṃyoga*, *gṛha*, *talpa*,
>> *vitāna*), allowing them through the power of metaphor to mean more than
>> what they customarily signify. In doing so, the sentence “I enter (reach)
>> you” ends up holding true, but only in a special sense.
>>
>>      While the imaginative exercises recorded in these verses have
>> presumably been performed sometime in the past—sometime before the yaksha
>> spots the cloud and Rama the goose—the present of each poem is filled with
>> the performance of yet another imaginative exercise; namely, the use of a
>> messenger or intermediary as a substitute for oneself. The yaksha gives us
>> his understanding of this exercise in *Meghadūta *2.43, where he
>> imagines the cloud introducing his message to his beloved as follows:
>>
>> ‘Once he longed to say in your ear
>>
>> what could have been spoken aloud
>>
>> in front of your friends,
>>
>> for he desired to touch your face.
>>
>> Now, though he is beyond earshot
>>
>> and unviewable to your eyes,
>>
>> through my mouth
>>
>> he says to you the following words
>>
>> which have been composed with longing: …’    217
>>
>>            In *Haṃsasandeśa *2.32, Rama has the goose greet Sita in
>> similar fashion:
>>
>> ‘Once your ornaments and body lotions
>>
>>  I am inspired by Yigal Bronner and David Shulman’s thought to read these
>> verses together; however, my account of their differences slightly diverges
>> from theirs. See “‘A Cloud Turned Goose’: Sanskrit in the Vernacular
>> Millennium,” *The Indian Economic & Social History Review*43, no. 1
>> (March 1, 2006): 26–27.
>>
>>       217 śabdākhyeyaṃ yad api kila te yaḥ sakhīnāṃ purastāt
>>
>> karṇe lolaḥ kathayitum abhūd ānanasparśalobhāt |
>>
>> so’tikrāntaḥ śravaṇaviṣayaṃ locanābhyām adṛśyas
>>
>> tvām utkaṇṭhāviracitapadaṃ manmukhenedam āha || *M *2.43 ||
>>
>>        were an obstacle to him; now the power of fate
>>
>> has led you to a distant island.
>>
>> Having placed you in the path of his eyes,
>>
>> as though he were very close,
>>
>> he who is faring well speaks thus, my lady,
>>
>> by the mouth of his friend: …’      218
>>
>>          Both verses begin by juxtaposing a past moment, when even a
>> negligible distance from the beloved seemed significant, with a present in
>> which the beloved is beyond the range of sight and hearing; both conclude
>> with the suggestion that a messenger is capable of dulling the pain of
>> separation. But in Vedantadesika’s version of the scenario, we are given an
>> additional detail concerning the sender of the message: Rama has composed
>> his words to Sita while visualizing her, “having placed Sita in the path of
>> his eyes.” I take this detail to indicate the crucial role that
>> visualization plays in this imaginative exercise as Vedantadesika
>> understands it. For if the use of an intermediary is to succeed in
>> simulating direct communication, both addresser and addressee must be made
>> to feel they are in each other’s presence. For Sita, that feeling would
>> arise by being addressed in the voice of Rama, as opposed to the mediating
>> voice of indirect speech (as critics often point out, much lyric poetry
>> derives its power from a first-person voicing which simulates the presence
>> of a live speaker). For Rama, the feeling of presence is achieved by making
>> Sita vivid to him through an act of visualization.
>>
>> Vedantadesika makes a similar specification about visualization in his
>> version of *Meghadūta *2.22. There the yaksha describes his beloved to
>> the cloud as follows:
>>
>> “One who is slender and dark,
>>
>> who has pointed teeth,
>>
>> whose lip is like a ripe red fruit,
>>
>> 218 yasyā yasmin vyavadhir abhavad bhūṣaṇālepanādiḥ
>>
>> nītām enāṃ niyativibhavād antarīpaṃ davīyaḥ |
>>
>> pratyāsīdanniva nayanayor vartmani sthāpayitvā
>>
>> sa tvām evaṃ vadati kuśalī devi sakhyā mukhena || *H *2.32 ||
>>
>> who is emaciated,
>>
>> who has the trembling eyes of a fawn
>>
>> and a sunken navel,
>>
>> who walks slowly due to her heavy hips,
>>
>> who is slightly hunched over due to her breasts,
>>
>> who seems she could have been
>>
>> the very first woman that Brahma created…219
>>
>>      Here is how Vedantadesika rewrites Kalidasa’s verse in *Haṃsasandeśa
>> *2.10:
>>
>> She is my seeing:
>>
>> her eyes are shaped like fish;
>>
>> her brows are curved; her hair is beautiful;
>>
>> she is thin; she bends over by the weight of her breasts;
>>
>> she is radiant as burning gold; she is young;
>>
>> her gait resembles yours;
>>
>> her waist is thin as a Vedic altar;
>>
>> her limbs are superlative;
>>
>> having learned the ocean called love,
>>
>> she seems the superior patron goddess for it.   220
>>
>> That the particular adjectives used to describe the women are different
>> should be unsurprising, since Sita and the yakshini are different
>> characters. The more significant difference concerns the strange way
>> Vedantadesika has Rama begin his description of Sita: *sā me dṛṣṭiḥ*—“she
>> is my vision,” or even “she is my seeing.” One way of getting around the
>> strangeness of this expression would be to take it as a hyperbolic metaphor
>> meaning something like “she is as precious to me as my vision.” However,
>> the emphasis placed throughout the poem on the actual sense of sight
>> …..(contd below)
>>
>> { notes in sanskrit verse of vedantha desikan:
>>
>> 219 tanvī śyāmā śikharidaśanā pakvabimbādharoṣṭhī
>>
>> madhye kṣāmā cakitahariṇīprekṣaṇā nimnanābhiḥ |
>>
>> śroṇībhārād alasagamanā stokanamnā stanābhyāṃ
>>
>> yā tatra syād yuvativiṣaye sṛṣṭir ādyeva dhātuḥ || *M *2.22 ||
>>
>> 220 sā me dṛṣṭiḥ śapharanayanā sannatabhrūḥ sukeśī
>>
>> tanvī tuṅgastanabharanatā taptajāmbūnadābhā |
>>
>> bālā yuṣmatpratimagamanā vedimadhyā varāṅgī
>>
>> śrṅgārākhyaṃ nidhim adhigatā śreyasī devateva || *H *2.10 ||
>>
>> The idea here is that, since Sita is so beautiful, she seems a more
>> suitable divinity of love than Kama himself.}}}
>>
>> ……..   discourages such an interpretation. If instead we took it to mean
>> something like “she is all that I see,” the sentence would tell us
>> something about how Rama speaks the words that follow. It would suggest
>> that Rama’s description of Sita isn’t just a list of words that he has kept
>> stored in memory but issues from a visualization of Sita in the present
>> moment; a visualization so intense, moreover, that Rama is moved to
>> describe it as seeing. Vedantadesika’s insistence on visualization in both
>> of these rewritings seems less to undermine Kalidasa’s depictions of
>> daydreaming (at least we need not take it that way) than to render explicit
>> the mental processes already at work in those depictions, offering
>> something like a gloss on them.
>>
>> Perhaps the most complex explorations of the imagination in these poems
>> appear in those verses where Rama and the yaksha imagine their beloveds
>> imagining them. In *H *2.61, for instance, Rama imagines that Sita has
>> been using his ring as a substitute for himself:
>>
>> “Again and again, by turns
>>
>> she puts my ring on her lotus-hand
>>
>> and her body thrills,
>>
>> hair standing on end;
>>
>> she keeps it on her head
>>
>> bereft of its jewel
>>
>> and enjoys it there;
>>
>> when her breasts
>>
>> grow burdened with pain
>>
>> from the grief inside, caringly
>>
>> she rests it upon them.  221”
>>
>> This verse recalls at least two moments in Kalidasa’s poetry. The first
>> of these appears in *Raghuvamsa *12.65 (examined above in section 3),
>> where Rama similarly uses Sita’s crest-jewel (choodamani)  as a substitute
>> for her. If we fancifully took Vedantadesika’s Rama as an extension of
>> Kalidasa’s   {{221 bhūyo bhūyaḥ karasarasije nyasya romāñcitāṅgīṃ
>>
>> maulau cūḍāmaṇivirahite nirviśantīṃ nidhāya
>>
>> antastāpād adhigatarujor ādarād arpayantīṃ
>>
>> paryāyeṇa stanakalaśayor aṅgulīyam madīyam || *H *2.16 || (to be taken
>> with *manye *from *H *2.13)}}
>>
>>      character, we could say that Rama here is imagining Sita as his
>> emotional mirror. The second moment appears in *Meghadūta *2.27, where
>> the yaksha imagines his beloved daydreaming about him in much the same way
>> that he has been daydreaming about her:
>>
>> ‘Or she marks on the ground
>>
>> the remaining months of the term
>>
>> which was set on the day of our separation,
>>
>> counting them with flowers
>>
>> laid in the doorway;
>>
>> *or she delights in our lovemaking*
>>
>> *keeping in her heart how it begins*;
>>
>> such are women’s diversions
>>
>> when their lovers are away.   “222
>>
>> In such verses, Vedantadesika and Kalidasa depict daydreaming on two
>> levels, showing us the beloved’s imaginative exercises while at the same
>> time portraying imagining-one’s-belovedimagining- oneself as itself a kind
>> of imaginative exercise. Throughout this chapter I have been using a
>> variety of words to write about the imaginative life of humans, some of
>> which may at first seem to clash (such as *daydream *and *exercise*).
>> This variety is a consequence not of imprecision but of the range of
>> genuine experiences of the imagination recorded in the works I’ve been
>> examining. For instance, while the imagination overwhelms consciousness in
>> characters like Maricha, Shakuntala, and Urvashi, the situation is reversed
>> in Vedantadesika’s *Saṅkalpasūryodaya*, where Imagination answers to
>> Will-Power (*vyavasāya*), obediently painting images on the mind’s wall.
>> Accordingly, while expressions like *daydream*, *reverie*,
>> *hallucination*, and *being carried away *correspond to experiences
>> where the imagination assails us against our will, words like *technique*,
>> *exercise*, *contemplation*, and *meditation *correspond to experiences
>> where imaginative intensity is desired but must be effortfully sought out.
>> Dushyanta’s experience fluctuates between these two extremes: his painting
>> of Shakuntala owes its lifelikeness to his imaginative mastery, but that
>> painting comes to assert a mastery of its own over Dushyanta, so thoroughly
>> absorbing him that he can’t distinguish his mental creation from reality.
>>
>> The experience of characters in the messenger poems is similarly
>> variable. The most obvious examples here are the yaksha and Rama: for each
>> lover, lovesickness has so intensely activated his imagination that he
>> starts speaking to a nonhuman; however, in the course of his monologue, he
>> comes to describe a number of imaginative techniques he uses to shut out
>> the harshness of his solitude. Less obvious but more illuminating (more
>> illuminating on what is distinct in *Haṃsasandeśa*) is the example of
>> Vedantadesika’s Sita. At times Sita seems completely passive to her
>> imagination, as when she starts speaking to her ornaments (*H *2.12); at
>> other times, she seems to be semiconsciously using her imagination to dull
>> the pain of her grief, as when she rests Rama’s ring on different parts of
>> her body (*H *2.16). While such instances find precedents in the *Meghadūta
>> *(specifically in verses where Kalidasa depicts the yakshini’s pining),
>> in *Haṃsasandeśa *2.22 Vedantadesika records an experience of the
>> imagination that is entirely absent in Kalidasa’s poem:
>>
>> “When the restraining of all mental states
>>
>> has quelled her stream of
>>
>> thoughts on the world outside,
>>
>> her mind shall be fixed on me alone,
>>
>> as per the writings on love:
>>
>> by a high intensity of her imagination
>>
>> which heeds none else,
>>
>> she shall be practicing unwavering meditation
>>
>> with a mind pliant from dissolving within.223”
>>
>>       Again we find Sita substituting an inner reality for the external
>> world that grieves her. But here that substitution results neither from a
>> cognitive error owing to delirium nor from a temporary coping tactic used
>> to drown out the harsh conditions of her kidnapping. Rather, it is achieved
>> in tranquility by an advanced yogic technique: Sita clears her mind of all
>> its representations of “the world outside” (*bahiḥ*), allowing it to
>> turn “within” (*antaḥ*) and, more pliant than before, to concentrate
>> fully and lovingly on Rama. The second half of the verse specifies the
>> nature of this concentration: it amounts to an “unwavering meditation” on
>> Rama, and is brought about not only through the negative labor of
>> restraining habitual patterns of thought but also through a positive
>> ffort—as Vedantadesika writes, repeating almost verbatim an expression we
>> encountered in Ramanuja’s *Śrībhāṣya*, “by a high intensity of the
>> imagination (*bhāvanāyāḥ prakarṣāt*).” That Vedantadesika reproduces
>> Ramanuja’s theological term in his description of Sita’s pining is crucial.
>> It suggests that what Vedantadesika gives us in *Haṃsasandeśa *2.22 is
>> an illustration not just of the lovesick imagination running on overdrive
>> but indeed of devotional meditation; or, put differently, that
>> Vedantadesika sees devotional meditation as continuous with the domain of
>> imaginative experience that messenger poetry is in its very nature
>> committed to exploring. Vedantadesika may even be suggesting that
>> devotional meditation just is the lovesick imagination running on
>> overdrive. Pursuing that line, we could venture the following shorthand
>> notations: *To be a devotee is to be a lover-in-separation; to be a
>> lover-in-separation is to be a  daydreamer; and to be a daydreamer is to be
>> a poet (that is, to be able to conjure a compelling inner reality by the
>> power of one’s imagination). And these formulations wouldn’t be misleading
>> either, so long as they were accompanied by two important qualifications.
>> The first concerns the status of will: whereas lovers are assailed by
>> daydreams against their will, devotees are to practice devotional
>> meditation by a deliberate technique. Indeed, it is precisely because
>> daydreams are so wayward that they often prove disastrous for Kalidasa’s
>> characters: both Urvashi and Shakuntala are cursed for succumbing to them,
>> and while Kalidasa doesn’t specify the negligence for which the yaksha has
>> been doomed to solitary confinement, it is reasonable to surmise based on
>> what we learn about the yaksha’s temperament, and as many traditional
>> readers have surmised, that his*
>>
>> *negligence too was the result of attentional failure.225 By contrast,
>> the kind of imaginative meditation that interests Vedantadesika is an ideal
>> to be achieved.*
>>
>> *The second qualification concerns the epistemological value of the
>> imagination: while the imagination distorts reality for sufferers of
>> daydreams, in devotional meditation it delivers the devotee to a higher
>> reality, as Vedantadesika notes in his remark on Maricha’s hallucinations.
>> To me, this notion of a higher reality is key to understanding
>> Vedantadesika’s counterintuitive claim in Haṃsasandeśa 1.4 that “finding a
>> messenger is greater fortune than embracing the beloved.” While embracing
>> the beloved is perhaps the highest form of intimacy possible in the world
>> of everyday experience, for Vedantadesika the everyday world is to be
>> distinguished from the ultimate reality of god. That reality is accessed
>> not through our common ways of sensing and understanding but through a
>> transcendental exercise of the imagination.*
>>
>>     KR IRS 14 1 23
>>
>
>
> --
> *Mar*
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Thatha_Patty" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/thatha_patty/CAL5XZooYbeRMBRwUEmSq%2BDAgMWUbrrNg5ejE4cNoj%2Bdk7gOQEQ%40mail.gmail.com.

Reply via email to