Bala Bharata A Critical Study

304 Pages·1992·19.3 MB·English

by  Ghanasyamala Prasada Rao,K

AGASTYA PANDITA'S
BALA BHARATA
A CRITICAL STUDY
K.GHANASYAMALA PRASADA RAO
Dr.
M.A., Ph.D.
AGASTYA PANDITA'S
BILA BHiRATA
A CRITICAL STUDY
The Author
First Edition:
Vijaya Dasarni - ^Ingirasa
October 1992
Copies 1000
Publisher:
Smt. K. S. Mahdlakshmi,
Manikyamba St., K. Agraharam,
Amalapuram - 533 201.
D.T.P.Composing:
JAGRITI GRAPHICS
NL4FUYANAGUDA,
3-4-705/4,
HYDERABAD
- 500 029
Phone: 662625
Cover design:
1 SI7RI '
Printed at:
Process
Kaldjyothi (p) Ltd.,
Musheerabad, Hyderabad
India
Price: Rs.200/-
U.S.$ 20
For Copies:
Sahitya Niketan
Barkatpura, Hyderabad-500 027
Phone:660004
To
MYREVERED PARENTS
Late. Dr. K.V. Appa Qao
and
6mt. K. Annapurnamma.
in
The Author acknowledges with thanks
the financial assistance rendered by
1. Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanams
Tirupati
2. Telugu University
Hyderabad
and
3. Sri Gottipati Chandrasekhar
and
Smt. Gottipati Satyavani
of
Sri Souseelya Education Trust (Regd.)
Hyderabad
Which is dedicated to national renaissance
through the inculcation of moral and ethical values
among children and youth.
IV
BLESSINGS
When Dr. Ghanasyamala Prasada Rao approched me with
a request to take him as a research scholar under my guidance I
accepted him for I knew him as apainstaking researcher even as a
P.G.studentofmine. Ihave been encouraging research scholars to
studytheliterarygiants ofAndhraDesa,especiallyAgastyaPandita
and Mallinatha Stiri. Dr. Prasada Rao took up the challenge and
did awonderful job.
The Balabharata of Agastya is certainly one of the great-
est Samskrita Mahdkavyas of the South. Agastya was a poet
ofgreat talent and fame. He was a prolific writer too, of proven
merit. However he is sometimes wrongly identified with the fa-
mous Vidyanatha, the author ofPrataparudriya. Dr. Prasada Rao
has proved beyond doubt that Vidyanatha and Agastya were two
different persons.
Mahdbhdrata has been a source of eternal inspiration to the
Indian people through out their long history. As such it has been
told again and again by various writers in various languages and
forms. BdlaBhdrataisone such attempt. Theepitomisation ofthe
original in beautiful poetry by Agastya has won the appreciation
ofSahridayas.
Dr. Prasada Rao made a .critical study of Bala Bhdrata from
literaryand cultural points ofviewwith nationalism as the guiding
force. I trust he will also bring out an authentic edition of Bala
Bharatawith the commentary.
Iwish Dr. Prasada Rao all well in his literary career and life.
Waltair, Dr. P. Sri Rama Miirthy,
28.6.92. Professor ofSanskrit, Andhra University,
Member, Advisory board for Sanskrit,
Sahitya Academy, New Delhi.
PREFACE
,<4ndhrade$a under the rule of the Kakatzyas of the
Ekasilanagara (Warangal) and the kings of Vijayanagara
witnessed a marked development of Sanskrit literature in
allitsbranches. AgastyaPanditawhoispraisedasone ofthe
greatest scholar-poets ofhis times by Gangadevi, the queen
ofVJrakamparaya and the author ofthe Mathuravijaya, has
enriched the Sanskrit literature with seventy four works.
But only three works of this great writer, BalaBhorata,
Krsnacarita and Nala Kzrtikaumudi have come down to
us; the last one only in fragments.
The Bala Bharata of about 1700 and odd verses, di-
vided into 20 cantos, is like the Bharatamanjari of Kse-
mendra, an epitome of the great epic Mahabharata. It is
this Mahakdvya which has won a good name for Agastya
Pandita as a Mahakavi. Dr. Ghanasyamala Prasada Rao
in his voluminous work "Agastya Pandita's Balabharata - A
Critical Study" has made a successful attempt to bring out
the greatness of this poem.
The Indian literary criticism has its own long tradition
of evaluation of a literary work which is perhaps not found
in any literature. There are many works ofAlankara sastra
laying the guidelines to produce and appreciate a literary
A
work. critic would write an exhaustive commentary on
a literary work of his choice and shows how it fulfils the
conditions laid down by the .Alankarikas to be called a good
poem or a drama by containing Alankaras, Gunas, Ritis,
Rasas and Sandhis etc; and by presenting proper heroes
and heroines. Therefore it is not correct to say, as some of
the modern critics are prone to think, that the Indian liter-
ary, criticism is deficient in its application, to the different
VI
)oetical works. Ifthe modern criticism is interested only in
liscussing about the poet, the plot construction in a poem
^nd other aspectslikecharacterisation etc., the Indian critics
re interested more in finding out the factors which make
literary work worthy of the name of a 'Kavya'. It does
lot mean that our critics are unaware of the importance of
tie plot-construction and the working of the poet's mind in
We
producing a good poetical work. find hints about the
lot-construction (as in the Dhvanyaloka while trying to de-
srmine the main Rasa in the Rdmdyana and Mahabhdrata)
nd also elaborate discussions (as in Vakraktijivita while ex-
laining Prakaranavakrata and Prabhandha-vakrata in the
3urth chapter) both Anandavardhana and Kuntaka explain
ow the working of a poet's mind reflects in the poem and
lakes it beautiful or otherwise:
^ftf:
era;" (fc^idlchilll -42)
i I
1-24)
Dr. Ghansydmala Prasdda Rao has used, in the present
rork, both the methods ofcriticism. Following the modern
lethod he discusses the author, his times and works in the
rst chapter and his skill in characterisation in the third
lapter. In the 2nd chapter in which he discusses about the
exterity of the poet in epitomisation of Mahdbharata we
nd a beautiful blend ofboth the modern andthe traditional
lethods. Thisdiscussionwhichisspeciallyrequiredonlyin a
iticalworkofthistypeofapoem, isverycarefullycarriedon
'f Dr. Prasdda Rao. After making a significant statement-
brevity in narration, clarity in expression, originality in
Jtting, beauty in treatment are the four pillars on which
rmly stands the edifice of epitomisation in any language",
5 proceeds to explain with proper examples how all these
Vll
qualities are found in Bala Bharata, making this as the bes
example for a fine work of epitomisation, looking like <
Mahakavya with a newly conceived original theme.
Santarasa is declared as the leading sentiment in
Mahabharata by Inandavardhana. Taking this clue,
Kalhana, in his Rajatarangini which describes the rise and
fall of the different dynasties and kings in Kashmir, main-
tains that Santa is the Angirasa in his work:
Perhapswemayapplythesameprincipletothe Raghuvamsa
also in determining Santa as the Angirasa. Now the author
of the present work also had no difficulty in determining
Santa as the Angirasa in Bala Bharata. In addition to this
he shows, in the fourth chapter, how Agastya Pandita has
depicted all the other Rasas also (asAngarasas) in different
places; Sringara in the story of Santanu, Vzrarasa in the
story of Drona and Drupada, Hasya in the story of Baka,
Adbhutarasa in the Mayasabha-episode, Bhayanaka in the
episode ofUttaragograhana, Bhayanaka and Bibhatsa in the
14th canto Raudra in Saindhava episode and Karuna in the
17th and 18th cantos.
Whatever may be the importance of Dhvani and other
elements in a Kavya, the style (Rzti) has its own impor-
tance, in the absence of which the whole poem would look
devoid of charm and therefore Vamana, the author of the
Kavyalankara sutra, isjustified, to some extent, in declaring
it as the very life ofa Kavya. In the fifth chapter the author
examines the style ofAgastya Pandita and explains with ex-
amples that the poet is a pastmaster ofthe VaidarbhJ
style.
Vamana cites the verse a^cK^i ft^r ...... (K.S.I.1) as the
VUl
imple for all the Gunas associated with the Vaidarbhirlti.
i the same lines the author expalins, by way of example
w the very first verse contains many of the Gunas. He
o explains how the poet uses different styles on differ-
t occasions with a sense of propriety. In the 6th chap-
while examining the number of Alankaras employed in
la Bharata; the author explains that Agastya Pandita has
ictly followed the guidelines given by .Anandavardhana in
;Dhvanyalaka "that 1)Alankaras must be ancillary2) they
Duldnotdominate3) theyshouldbecurtailed or expanded
accordance with the main idea of the context 4) extra
iboration of Alankara must be avoided and in case of
iboration, they should clearly be made secondary to the
isa".
Mahabharata is rightly viewed by some as a
larmas'astra and it is natural therefore that its epitome
ould contain some ofthe essential aspects ofthe Dharma.
; is cited earlier Kuntaka feels that the nature of the poet
fleets in a poem. The same can be said in the case of
critical work also. Dr. Ghanasydmala Prasada Rao is a
eat lover, strict follower and sincere exponent of Indian
Iture and the highvalues oflife cultivated through it. He,
erefore, devotesonechapterto dealwith theIndian Ethics
generaland the ethicscontained inBala Bharata inpartic-
ar. In the 8th chapter the author makes an assessment of
e impact of Vyasa and Kalidasa on Agastya Pandita and
gastya Pandita's impact on authors of Bharatacampu and
kkanasomayaji, the author of .Andhra Mahabharata. Dr.
hanasyamalaPrasada Raohasdoneahighlycreditableser-
cetotheSamskritaliteraturebywritingthismonograph on
i almost forgotten work, Bala Bharata in which he shows
s critical acumen, clear understanding of the concepts of
lankaras'astra and the interpretative boldness. But there
e a few places where one may find it difficult to agree
IX
rroLui views expressed by the learned author regarding the
identity ofAgastya Pandita with Vidydndtha.
Many scholars like Dr.V. Raghavan and Prof. T.
Venkat&aracharya are in favour of accepting that Agastya
Panditawasone ofthecourt-poets ofPratdparudra II (1292-
1323). Viswanatha who flourished in the court of Prata-
parudra II mentions Agastya Pandita as hismaternal uncle.
Therefore Agastya Pandita may have to be accepted as the
contemporary ofPrataparudraII The sentence 3TTO^ftsRT: in
3|Hfr4srfe cfinf^ etc., (Prataparudriya II - 60) conveys the sense
that "I am after all Agastya" but not "I am like Agastya".
Therefore inspite of many arguments of scholars like Prof.
Venkatdcharya and.the present author against the identity
of Agastya Pandita and Vidydnatha, this question may be
left as an open one. In the view of the above; the indebted-
ness of Tikkana to Agastya Pandita is doubtful In fact the
examples cited to show such influence appear to be notvery
convincing. All this is, ofcourse, my personal opinion which
I amprepared to change ifstronger evidence to thecontrary
is forthcoming. I am writing this to show how the work of
Dr. Ghanasydmala Prasdda Rao is thought-provoking and
stimulates further research on this subject.
'NANDANAM'
P. Srtrdmachandrudu,
Begampet, Vedanta Siromani,
Hyderabad Veddnta Visdrada, Vidvan
14th June, 1992. M.A., Phd; (Skt) M.A. (English)
MA.
(Hindi)
Rtd. Professor of Sanskrit
Osmania University, Hyderabad