Harsha Dehejia harshadehejia at HOTMAIL.COM
Tue May 1 11:54:24 EDT 2007

It is useful to bring in the concept of mukhyartha bAdhA or breakdown of primary meaning.
In a lakshanA or simple metaphor there is mukyartha bAdhA while in dhvani or extended metaphor or allegory there is no mukyartha bAdhA.
Harsha V. Dehejia
Carleton University, Ottawa, ON., Canada.

> Date: Tue, 1 May 2007 17:06:57 +0200> From: christophe.vielle at UCLOUVAIN.BE> Subject: Re: pratiika/allegory> To: INDOLOGY at> > At the end of his commentary on Maalatiimaadhava > entitled the Rasamañjarii (Trivandrum Sanskrit > Series 170, p. 621), Puur.nasarasvatii (ca 1300) > gives an allegorical meaning for each of the > characters of Bhavabuuti's play, without really > theorizing on his views. But according to his > stress on the concept of deeper or implicit > meaning in his Vidyullataa's commentary on the > Meghasa.mde/sa (cf. Poul Skraep, Orientalia > Suecana, 27-28, 1978-79, pp. 176-210), I suggest, > without being a specialist,that his ideas on > «allegory» (without naming it as such) belong to > the sphere of the theory of suggestion (dhvani).> Best wishes,> Christophe Vielle> > > > > > > > >Dear Matthew,> >> >While I don't have any suggestion for the earliest use of> >pratiika as a possible calque for allegory, I do know (from> >a conversation with Aditya Behl a year or so ago) that the> >term is used more widely in Hindi literary criticism to> >describe, for instance, the similarly 'allegorical'> >dimensions of the Sufi premaakhyaans.> >> >As for a local theory of allegory, I have one suggestion. > >It was a few years ago, but I remember that in "Sivaraama's> >commentary on the Naagaananda (edited by T. Ganapati Sastri,> >Trivandrum Sanskrit Series no. 59), he consistently referred> >to the second, 'allegorical' dimension to the plot under the> >rubric of 'garbhokti'. > >> >I don't recall how systematic "Sivaraama was in applying> >this, nor incidentally do I know any details of his time or> >place (though I presume he may have been from Kerala, given> >that he also commented on the plays of Kula"sekharavarman,> >which were I believe works of strictly local circulation). > >I've never seen this rubric used in any work on dramaturgy> >or ala.mkaara---though other list members certainly may have-> >--but at least it might be a place to start.> >> >best,> >> >Whitney> >> >> >---- Original message ----> >>Date: Tue, 1 May 2007 05:58:31 -0500> >>From: mkapstei at UCHICAGO.EDU > >>Subject: pratiika/allegory > >>To: INDOLOGY at> >>> >>In current Indian writing on Sanskrit drama,> >>the term pratiika-naa.taka is sometimes used for> >>allegorical dramas in the tradition of the> >>Prabodhacandrodaya of K.r.s.namizra, e.g.,> >>Suuryasa.mkalpodaya, Caitanyacandrodaya, Am.rtodaya,> >>etc. But just when and where is this term> >>pratiika-naa.taka first used? Is it, in fact,> >>a modern coinage based on Eng. "allegorical drama"?> >>> >>Even if the term is of recent origin, was there ever> >>another way of theorizing "allegory" in traditional> >>dramaturgy and poetics? (In esoteric religious materials,> >>of course, we find such notions as niguu.dhaartha applied> >to> >>allegorical readings of tantric texts and the like, but> >>I am not interested in that sort of thing here, unless> >>a direct link to notions of literary allegory seems likely.)> >>> >>Of course, as has been widely noted, the practice of> >>allegorical writing in India can be found as early as> >>some hymns of the .rg-veda. However, I am not interested> >here> >>in texts that, as a matter of fact, are allegorical or> >>have been treated as allegorical (e.g., Za.nkara's reading> >of> >>Arjuna's grief at the opening of BhG). My question concerns> >>just the conceptualization and theorization of "allegory."> >>> >>With thanks for your houghts about this.> >>> >>Matthew T. Kapstein> >>Numata Visiting Professor of Buddhist Studies> >>The University of Chicago Divinity School> >>> >>Directeur d'études> >>Ecole Pratique des Hautes Etudes, Paris

More information about the INDOLOGY mailing list