{"id":352,"date":"2024-08-06T15:59:38","date_gmt":"2024-08-06T15:59:38","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/parispanda.ssus.ac.in\/?p=352"},"modified":"2026-03-19T01:39:04","modified_gmt":"2026-03-19T01:39:04","slug":"poetry","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/parispanda.ssus.ac.in\/index.php\/2024\/08\/06\/poetry\/","title":{"rendered":"Poetry and Logic: Mahimabha\u1e6d\u1e6da\u2019s Epistemology"},"content":{"rendered":"\r\n
\r\n
Chettiarthodi Rajendran<\/strong><\/a><\/div>\r\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n
\r\n
\r\n


Mahimabha\u1e6d\u1e6da\u2019s Vyaktiviveka<\/em> was written with the avowed object of demonstrating that the so called suggested meaning\u00a0 postulated by \u0100nandavardhana as the soul\u00a0 of poetry is actually to be treated as inferred meaning. Inference is a key concept in Indian epistemological tradition discussed at length by earlier philosophers like the Buddhists and the Naiy\u0101yikas. Hence the substantiation ofMahimabha\u1e6d\u1e6da\u2019s thesis naturally\u00a0\u00a0 involves a lot of threadbare analysis of the process of inference related to language, an issue which is of pivotal significance to epistemology. This has resulted in theVyaktiviveka<\/em>becoming one of the few treatises on Sanskrit poetics which have discussed epistemological\u00a0\u00a0 issues related to literature in a comprehensive manner. Pram\u0101\u1e47a-<\/em>s constitute an important\u00a0\u00a0 aspect in Mahimabha\u1e6d\u1e6da\u2019s discussion of inference\u00a0 since the very basis of inference is its validity ascertained through them. The present paper is an attempt to examine the historical evolution of the nature of the three fold pram\u0101\u1e47a-<\/em>s,\u00a0 viz., loka, veda<\/em> and addhy\u0101tma<\/em> mentioned by Mahimabha\u1e6d\u1e6da in his epistemological discussions related to inference(anum\u0101na<\/em>).

In contrast with the majority of literary theorists\u00a0 who systematically distinguish creative literature(k\u0101vya<\/em>) from scientific discourses(\u015b\u0101stras<\/em>), Mahimabha\u1e6d\u1e6da maintains that k\u0101vya<\/em> is also can be treated as\u00a0 a \u015b\u0101stra<\/em>.[1]<\/a> The reason implicit in his argument is that poetry, like a \u015b\u0101stra<\/em>, imparts instruction to the reader\u00a0 about the\u00a0 dos (prav\u1e5bttis<\/em>) and the donots (niv\u1e5bttis<\/em>) in life. Mahimabha\u1e6d\u1e6da does not , however, accept the far reaching\u00a0 implications of this stand that poetry should, like\u00a0\u00a0 \u015b\u0101stras<\/em>\u00a0 always present valid\u00a0 knowledge. In fact, he maintains that the test of validity applied to the facts presented in poetry would amount to being ridiculous[2]<\/a>. However, he seems to contradict himself when he\u00a0\u00a0 follows a vigorous methodology in the analysis of all linguistic usage(\u015b\u0101bdavyavah\u0101ra<\/em>),\u00a0 in which he does not seem to make any concession for imaginative literature. From all this, we can conclude that while he is against the application of validity test to the facts presented in imaginative literature, he assumes that even in its realm, literature, being a linguistic communication, has to follow the logical structure of language. Poetry may create an illusion, but the logic of poetic language is that of the language of the real world[3]<\/a>.\u00a0

At the very outset of his epistemological\u00a0discussions, Mahimabha\u1e6d\u1e6da\u00a0maintains that the process of inference is present\u00a0\u00a0 in the conviction generated by all types of linguistic communication[4]<\/a>. This statement is very important in that it does not make a distinction between poetic and ordinary languages.\u00a0\u00a0 An addresser uses language to persuade or dissuade the addressee; the former wants the latter to do certain things and to abstain from doing certain other things. Now nobody will be convinced about anything unless he\/she understands the logic behind it and without generating such conviction, the addressor cannot expect the addressee to act in the manner which we feel desirable. This logical demonstration is the very foundational principle of all linguistic communication. Mahimabha\u1e6d\u1e6da demonstrates with great insight that even seemingly innocuous facts and statements presented in literary languages are carefully orchestrated attempts to substantiate arguments presented overtly or covertly.\u00a0 A logical relation involves the juxtaposition of probandum<\/em>, (s\u0101dhya<\/em>)\u00a0\u00a0 the thing to be substantiated and probans<\/em>, (s\u0101dhana<\/em>), the means of its substantiation. It can be represented as \u2018smoke, therefore fire\u2019(x, therefore y).\u00a0 In actual linguistic usage, however, it is only sometimes that their relationship is thus expressly stated; in many instances, a smart listener grasps their latent connection even when it is not explicitly stated[5]<\/a>. Mahimabha\u1e6d\u1e6da also maintains that in an ordinary sentence, it is the subject (anuv\u0101dya<\/em>) part\u00a0 which functions as\u00a0\u00a0 the probans and the predicate( vidheya<\/em>) which becomes the probandum. The following sentences ,randomly\u00a0\u00a0 extracted from K\u0101lid\u0101sa\u2019s poetry,\u00a0 could illustrate the relationship\u00a0 of probans<\/em> and probandum.<\/em><\/p>\r\n<\/div>\r\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

\u00a0<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

    \r\n
  1. \u2018He became the father of the subjects by instilling obedience in them, by protecting them and by ruling them.\u2019<\/li>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n
  2. \u2018Being eager to meet the daughter of the mountain[P\u0101rvat\u012b], the lord of animals, [\u015aiva] also spent those [pre-marital] days with great difficulty.\u2019<\/li>\r\n<\/ol>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

    In the first instances, we can see that fatherhood is substantiated by the instillation of obedience and the like. In the second sentence, the difficulty in spending the days on the part of lord \u015aiva is substantiated by the fact that he was very eager to meet P\u0101rvat\u012b.<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

    All this logical relationship is at the level of the expressed meaning. Mahimabha\u1e6d\u1e6da maintains that it is the same relationship of probans<\/em> and probandum<\/em> also occurs in between the expressed meaning and the so called suggested meaning. The following verse, cited as an instance of suggested meaning (dhvani) by\u00a0 \u0100nandavardhana\u00a0 could be an example of it:<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

    \r\n

    Three men reap the earth<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

    Of its flower of gold<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

    The warrior, the man of learning,<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

    And he who knows to serve[6]<\/a><\/p>\r\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

    Here the explicit statement of three men harvesting earth of its flower of gold leads one to the inference that \u2018prosperity is abundant to these people everywhere\u2019.[7]<\/a> Here also the relationship is \u2018x therefore y\u2019 between the expressed and the implied meanings. The expressed meaning of harvesting the earth of its golden flowers is an impossibility and it causes the inference of\u00a0 a meaning similar to it. Mahimabha\u1e6d\u1e6da clarifies the process as happening through\u00a0\u00a0 subordinate function (upac\u0101ravrtti<\/em>) of the sentence, but it becomes a bit unconvincing since he does not accept upac\u0101ra<\/em>as a separate function apart from inference [8]<\/a><\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

    It is when dealing with the question of comprehending the invariable concomitance between the probans<\/em> and the probandum<\/em> that Mahimabha\u1e6d\u1e6da touches upon the problem of the means of valid knowledge(pram\u0101\u1e47a-<\/em>s) . According to him, it is through pram\u0101\u1e47a-<\/em>s\u00a0\u00a0 that one comprehends this relationship. In this connection, he mentions three such pram\u0101\u1e47a-<\/em>s,viz, loka, veda<\/em> and addhy\u0101tma<\/em>,\u00a0 reinforcing his argument with\u00a0 a passage from thecitr\u0101bhinaya<\/em> chapter of N\u0101\u1e6dya\u015b\u0101stra<\/em>which he quotes anonymously[9]<\/a>. The passage is translated as follows by Manmohan Ghosh: [10]<\/a><\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

    The people, the vedas<\/em> and the spiritual faculty (adhy\u0101tma<\/em>) are known as the three authorities. The drama is mostly based on objects related to the last two ( theveda<\/em> and the adhyatma<\/em>).The drama which has origin in the Vedas and the spiritual faculty (adhyatma<\/em>) and includes [proper] word and meter , succeeds\u00a0 when it is approved of by the people. Hence the people are considered as the [ultimate] authority on the drama.<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

    However, the reference is beset with a lot of problems as, from the context\u00a0 it would appear that\u00a0 the passage does not refer to the comprehension of any inferred meaning at all. It\u00a0 actually refers to thesepram\u0101\u1e47a-<\/em>s as the ultimate point of reference in determining the\u00a0 type of\u00a0 specific\u00a0 acting. It is clear that the passage does not describe\u00a0\u00a0 the three fold pram\u0101\u1e47a-<\/em>s\u00a0 as the authority from which the invariable concomitance of the expressed and the inferred sense is determined. What the passage postulates is the intimate connection between theatre (n\u0101\u1e6dya<\/em>)and the scripture (veda<\/em> ) on one hand and theatre\u00a0 and spiritual faculty (adhy\u0101tma<\/em> )on the other and finally between theatre and people(loka<\/em>) in the judgment of the propriety of acting.\u00a0<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

    The three key terms in the original passage also furnish some difficulties in interpretation as the N\u0101\u1e6dya\u015b\u0101stra<\/em>does not care to define them. As to veda<\/em>, there seems to be no problem since the passage alludes to the intimate connection between n\u0101\u1e6dya<\/em>and veda,<\/em> which is regarded as the source of it in the myth related to its origin described in the first chapter of the text. Loka<\/em>of course refers to the people at large. The intimate relationship between the behavior of people and histrionic representation in theatre is accounted for in concepts likelokadharm\u012b<\/em>\u00a0 in the N\u0101\u1e6dya\u015b\u0101stra. <\/em>On the other hand, the term adhy\u0101tma<\/em>\u00a0 which Dr. Ghosh translates as spiritual remains problematic since the word does not convey any specific meaning applicable to the context.<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

    Abhinavagupta gives a totally different interpretation to the passage.However, the interpretation is not at all very clear and there are many obscurities in the Abhinavabh\u0101rati passage.\u00a0 According to him, loka<\/em> means the threefold pram\u0101\u1e47a-<\/em>s\u00a0 of perception(pratyak\u1e63a<\/em>), inference(anum\u0101na<\/em>) and scripture\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 (\u0101gama)<\/em> , which tallies with the pram\u0101\u1e47a-<\/em>s\u00a0 accepted in his \u015aaiva metaphysics. If this were the case , the inclusion of veda<\/em> in the list will be redundant as \u0101gama<\/em>coming under loka<\/em> will have already\u00a0 covered\u00a0 it. In order to overcome this difficulty, Abhinavagupta, in an obscure passage appears to have\u00a0 proposed the interpretation that it is meant to include systems like\u00a0 archery (dhanurveda<\/em> ) and music (g\u0101ndharvaveda<\/em>), which are generally treated as Upavedas<\/em>. [11]<\/a>His interpretation of adhy\u0101tma<\/em>\u00a0 also seems to be somewhat different from \u2018spiritual\u2019. He seems to suggest that there are certain things grasped through intuition rather than through canonized texts. Thus, while the \u2018correlation of word\u2019 , (\u015babdasamanvaya\u1e25<\/em>, probably meaning the appropriateness of the word), can be determined with the help of grammar and lexicon, the accuracy of meter is something grasped intuitively.[12]<\/a>Abhinava suggests in this context that the elegance of the meter is something understood by oneself; thereupon, basing on this experience, one selects the appropriate melody and language for the song. The whole passage in the end reinforces the importance ofloka<\/em>in drama as \u015b\u0101stra<\/em> has very limited scope.<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

    When we compare these passages of N\u0101\u1e6dya\u015b\u0101stra<\/em>andAbhinavabh\u0101rat\u012b<\/em>, with Vyaktiviveka<\/em> and the commentary of Ruyyaka thereon, we can see that Mahimabha\u1e6d\u1e6da has completely reworked on these concepts of pram\u0101\u1e47a-<\/em>s\u00a0 to suit his own epistemological requirements. In his concept, there is a sea change in the very notion and function of these pram\u0101\u1e47a-<\/em>s\u00a0 . Unlike the N\u0101\u1e6dya\u015b\u0101stra<\/em> notion, these pram\u0101\u1e47a-<\/em>s\u00a0 are not reference points to acting; on the other hand, they are adduced as the ground on which the invariable concomitance between\u00a0 the probans<\/em> and the\u00a0 probandum<\/em>\u00a0 is determined. Mahimabha\u1e6d\u1e6da also gives clear-cut definition of every pram\u0101\u1e47a. <\/em>Thus, loka<\/em>signifies that which\u00a0 encompasses anything\u00a0 well known in the world. Veda <\/em>has an extended significance as it constitutes not only the vedas, but\u00a0 itih\u0101sas, pur\u0101\u1e47as, dharma\u015bastras<\/em>etc, which \u2018owe their origin to vedas<\/em>.\u2019[13]<\/a>\u00a0 According to Mahimabha\u1e6d\u1e6da, veda<\/em> thus\u00a0\u00a0 refers to anything\u00a0 well known only in the domain of knowledge systems. According to Ruyyaka, this two fold\u00a0 distinction is intended to distinguish between\u00a0 textualised knowledge and mere folk knowledge not couched in texts.[14]<\/a>Mahimabha\u1e6d\u1e6da\u2019s definition of ahhy\u0101tma<\/em> is not clear. It is described as that which comes within the purview of the \u2018soul\u2019(\u0101dhy\u0101tmik\u0101rthavi\u1e63ayam<\/em>), but Ruyyaka unambiguously interprets it as direct perception(pratyak\u1e63a<\/em>). He further clarifies the position that through this list, actually two means of valid knowledge are accepted, viz., perception and scripture, with the latter further distinguished into textualised and non- textualised forms.[15]<\/a>According to Ruyyaka, the omission of inference in the list is simply the fact that it is for the sake of\u00a0 inference that the assistance of other pram\u0101\u1e47a<\/em>-s is sought.<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

    A perusal of the profuse illustrations given by Mahimabha\u1e6d\u1e6da for the three foldpram\u0101\u1e47a-<\/em>s\u00a0\u00a0 will convince us that whichever may be the source utilized by him, he has been able to build up a consistent epistemological structure on the basis of it. According to him, the so called language is able to convince the reader of the validity of the substantiated facts with the help of the implicit logic we have already internalized through our previous direct perception and traditional acquired fund of knowledge available through textualised or oral sources.<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

    Let us take up some examples cited in Dhvany\u0101loka<\/em>and\u00a0 discussed by Mahimabha\u1e6d\u1e6da.The first verse furnishes an example where the invariable concomitance is grasped from the world.<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

    \r\n

    Go your rounds freely, gentle monk;<\/em><\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

    The little dog is gone.<\/em><\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

    Just today from the thickets of the God\u0101<\/em><\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

    Came a fearsome lion and killed him[16]<\/strong><\/a><\/em><\/p>\r\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

    \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 The verse\u00a0\u00a0 represents the words of a lady addressed to a mendicant who was plucking flowers from a beautiful creeper bough on riverside where the lady had promised to meet her lover. She wants the mendicant to go away from the place and accomplishes her objective in a covert way. All that she tells him is that he can wander freely there since the dog which was a menace has been killed by the terrible lion living on the banks of the river. Here the discerning reader cancels the expressed meaning and understands that the verse means exactly the opposite. The probans<\/em> prompting the inference is the presence of an animal which is fiercer than the dog. One understands that for a person who is afraid of a dog will definitely be wary of a fiercer animal.The relationship between the two facts is understood from the \u2018world\u2019(loka<\/em>).<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

    Mahimabha\u1e6d\u1e6da has furnished several examples of suggestive poetry wherein the implicit invariable concomitance of the probans<\/em>and theprobandum<\/em> is grasped through directt perception.<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

    \r\n

    Go, and let the sighs and tears<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

    Be mine ;nor let them rise<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

    from you as well, tortured<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

    being without her, by your hateful courtesy.[17]<\/a><\/p>\r\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

    In the above example, the wronged heroine tells the hero, who had offended her by making love to another girl, to go away from her since she does not want to make the other girl also\u00a0 miserable. Here though Mahimabha\u1e6d\u1e6da maintains that\u00a0 the same results\u00a0 proposed in the dhvani theory can be obtained by applying inference, the inferred meaning according to his interpretation is different from what Abhinavagupta\u00a0 demonstrates in his interpretation. According to him, the inferred meaning is that the hero has come there out of sheer courtesy [of pretending ] to maintain their former relationship and actually he is a hypocrite.[18]<\/a> But in Mahimabha\u1e6d\u1e6da\u2019s interpretation, the meaning inferred is that the hero is in love with the other girl. This is prompted by the fact that on being separated from her, he may have symptoms of separation like deep sigh and weeping. The invariable concomitance between love and the pangs of separation is understood by a reader through direct experience.<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

    It is somewhat intriguing that of the forty-six verses taken up for discussion from Dhvany\u0101loka,<\/em> there is not a single instance wherein Mahimabha\u1e6d\u1e6da has taken recourse to veda<\/em>\u00a0 to substantiate\u00a0 the invariable concomitance of the probans and the probandum. However, we are fortunate in recovering one verse of explicit probans\/probandum<\/em>\u00a0\u00a0 at the expressed level authenticated by veda<\/em>. In this verse, occurring in Kum\u0101rasambhava<\/em>, K\u0101lid\u0101sa states that Him\u0101laya was not in a position to make \u015aiva accept his daughter as the latter had not asked for her hand. Here, Mahimabha\u1e6d\u1e6da states that the invariable relationship between \u2018not being asked\u2019 and \u2018not capable of giving away\u00a0 the\u00a0 daughter\u2019 is known through veda<\/em>. Here he cites the following verse\u00a0 from an anonymous source, which in all probability could be some version of the Mahabharata.<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

    O the descendant of Bharata! All things are to be given unasked. Food,\u00a0 knowledge and a maiden are not\u00a0 to be given to people unless they ask for them. [19]<\/a><\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

    From all this, it can be seen that Mahimabha\u1e6d\u1e6da has shaped an epistemological structure using material from theN\u0101\u1e6dya\u015b\u0101stra<\/em>\u00a0\u00a0 selectively and modifying them so as to suit his requirements.\u00a0 His eclectical project will be more clear if we consider that it is the inferential structure of the Buddhists which he deploys to counter the dhvani theory, as he uses concepts like identity (t\u0101d\u0101tmya<\/em>) and causal relationship (tadutpatti<\/em>) as the basis of invariable concomitance\u00a0 like the Buddhists and not mere invariable presence of the probans<\/em> and probandum<\/em>[20]<\/a>. But Mahimabha\u1e6d\u1e6da holds all the cards close to him and does not find it incongruous to accept Veda as a pram\u0101\u1e47a, <\/em>even while making use of Buddhist logic in his epistemology.<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

    Bibliography<\/strong><\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

    \r\n

    Abhinavagupta 1987 Abhinavabh\u0101rat\u012b<\/em>,Vol. III, Delhi: Parimal\u00a0 Publications.<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

    Ingalls, Daniel H.H , Masson, Jeffrey Moussaieff\u00a0 and Patwardhan, M.V. 1990. The Dhvany\u0101loka of \u0100nandavardhana with the Locana of Abhinavagupta<\/em>. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

    Ghosh, Manmohan 1950 The Natyasastra of Bharatamuni<\/em> English translation, Vol I.Calcutta: The Royal Asiatic Society of Bengal.<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

    Mahimabha\u1e6d\u1e6da, Vyaktiviveka<\/em>, (Ed.Prof.Rewaprasada Dwivedi) with a Sanskrit commentary of R\u0101janaka Ruyyaka.1982:Varanasi: Chowkhambha Sanskrit Sansthan<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

    Rajendran,C.1989.\u00a0 \u2018Mahimabha\u1e6d\u1e6da\u2019s concept of poetry as a \u015a\u0101stra\u2019, Brahmavidya, The Adyar Library Bulletin, <\/em>Vol.53, pp113-120<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

    Rajendran, C. Is Rasa an Illusion? A study in Mahimabha\u1e6d\u1e6da\u2019s Aesthetics Brahmavidya pp.221-237<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

    Rajendran, C. \u2018Influence of Buddhist Philosophy on Mahimabha\u1e6d\u1e6da\u2019 S.V.U Oriental Journal, XLI,pp. 52-65<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

    Rajendran, C. (2003).\u00a0Vyaktiviveka: A Critical Study<\/em>. Delhi: New Bharatiya Book Corporation.<\/p>\r\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n

    \r\n\r\n\r\n
    \r\n

    [1]<\/a>k\u0101vyasy\u0101pi \u015b\u0101stratvam pratip\u0101ditam eva, Vyaktiviveka<\/em>, p.483.See also C.Rajendran, \u2018Mahimabha\u1e6d\u1e6da\u2019s concept of poetry as a \u015aastra\u2019, Brahmavidya, The Adyar Library Bulletin, <\/em>Vol.53, pp113-120<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

    [2]<\/a>k\u0101vyavi\u1e63aye\u00a0 ca v\u0101cyavy\u1e45gy\u0101n\u0101m saty\u0101satyavic\u0101ro nirupayoga eveti\u00a0 tattra pram\u0101\u1e47\u0101ntarapar\u012bk\u1e63\u0101\u00a0 upah\u0101s\u0101ya eva sampadyate iti.Vyaktiviveka<\/em>, p.78<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

    [3]<\/a> See, for details, Rajendran, C.\u00a0 \u2018 Is Rasa an Illusion? A study in Mahimabhatta\u2019s Aesthetics\u2019 Brahmavidya <\/em>Vol. 68-70\u00a0 pp.221-237.<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

    [4]<\/a>sarva eva hi \u015babdo vyavah\u0101ra\u1e25\u00a0 s\u0101dhyas\u0101dhanabh\u0101vagarbhatay\u0101 pr\u0101ye\u1e47\u0101num\u0101nar\u016bpo\u2019vagantavya\u1e25 Vyaktiviveka,<\/em> p.27.<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

    [5]<\/a><\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

    [6]<\/a>Mah\u0101bh\u0101rata <\/em>5.35.64, translation by Ingalls et.al, The Dhvany\u0101loka of \u0100nandavardhana with the Locana of Abhinavagupta<\/em>,p.173<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

    [7]<\/a>Vyaktiviveka<\/em>, p.57.<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

    [8]<\/a>Vyaktiviveka<\/em>, p.473<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

    [9]<\/a> I remember with gratitude that it was Professor K.Krishnamoorthy invited my attention to the N\u0101\u1e6dya\u015b\u0101stra <\/em>passage in a personal conversation way back in 1980<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

    [10]<\/a> Manmohan Ghosh, N\u0101\u1e6dya\u015b\u0101stra,<\/em> English translation, Vol I, p. 509<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

    [11]<\/a>Abhinavabharati<\/em>,Vol. III, p.278<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

    [12]<\/a> Ibid.<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

    [13]<\/a>vedagraha\u1e47m itih\u0101sapur\u0101\u1e47adharma\u015b\u0101str\u0101dyupalak\u1e63a\u1e47am te\u1e63\u0101m tanm\u016blatvopagam\u0101t<\/em>,.Vyaktiviveka<\/em>, p.53.<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

    [14]<\/a>Ruyyaka, Vyaktivivekavy\u0101khy\u0101na<\/em>, p.53.<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

    [15]<\/a> Ibid.<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

    [16]<\/a>Sattasi, 2.75, Translation by Ingalls et.al, The Dhvany\u0101loka of \u0100nandavardhana with the Locana of Abhinavagupta<\/em>, p.83<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

    [17]<\/a>Ingalls et.al, The Dhvany\u0101loka of \u0100nandavardhana with the Locana of Abhinavagupta<\/em>,p.100<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

    [18]<\/a> Ibid, p.101<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

    [19]<\/a>Vyaktiviveka<\/em>, p.53.<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

    [20]<\/a> See for details, C.Rajendran, \u2018Influence of Buddhist Philosophy on Mahimabha\u1e6d\u1e6da,\u2019 S.V.U Oriental Journal, XLI,pp. 52-65<\/p>\r\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

    \r\n
    Download PDF<\/strong><\/a><\/div>\r\n<\/div>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

    \u00a0<\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n

     <\/p>\r\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

    \u00a0 In the first instances, we can see that fatherhood is substantiated by the instillation of obedience and the like. In the second sentence, the difficulty in spending the days on the…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[4],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-352","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-parispanda-2025"],"gutentor_comment":6,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/parispanda.ssus.ac.in\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/352","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/parispanda.ssus.ac.in\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/parispanda.ssus.ac.in\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/parispanda.ssus.ac.in\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/parispanda.ssus.ac.in\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=352"}],"version-history":[{"count":15,"href":"https:\/\/parispanda.ssus.ac.in\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/352\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":800,"href":"https:\/\/parispanda.ssus.ac.in\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/352\/revisions\/800"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/parispanda.ssus.ac.in\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=352"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/parispanda.ssus.ac.in\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=352"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/parispanda.ssus.ac.in\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=352"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}