Saurashtra University Re – Accredited Grade ‘B’ by NAAC (CGPA 2.93) Vyas, Maulik P., 2011, “Literature as Knowledge in Indian and Western Traditions”, thesis PhD, Saurashtra University http://etheses.saurashtrauniversity.edu/id/844 Copyright and moral rights for this thesis are retained by the author A copy can be downloaded for personal non-commercial research or study, without prior permission or charge. This thesis cannot be reproduced or quoted extensively from without first obtaining permission in writing from the Author. The content must not be changed in any way or sold commercially in any format or medium without the formal permission of the Author When referring to this work, full bibliographic details including the author, title, awarding institution and date of the thesis must be given. Saurashtra University Theses Service http://etheses.saurashtrauniversity.edu [email protected] © The Author Literature as Knowledge in Indian and Western Traditions Submitted for the Degree of Ph. D. in English to Saurashtra University, Rajkot SUPERVISOR: RESEARCHER: Avadhesh Kumar Singh Maulik P Vyas Director M.A. (English), M. Phil. School of Translation Studies Dept. of English & CLS & Training Saurashtra University I ndira Gandhi National O pen Rajkot, Gujarat U niversity , New Delhi December 2011 Literature as Knowledge in Indian and Western Traditions Submitted for the Degree of Ph. D. in English to Saurashtra University, Rajkot SUPERVISOR: RESEARCHER: Avadhe sh Kumar Singh Maulik P Vyas Director M.A. (English), M. Phil. School of Translation Studies Dept. of English & CLS & Training Saurashtra University Indira Gandhi N ational Open Rajkot, Gujarat University , New Delhi December 2011 Department of English & Comparative Literary Studies, Saurashtra University, Rajkot (Gujarat) CERTIFICATE This is to certify that the work embodied in this thesis entitled “Literature as Knowledge in Indian and Western Traditions” is submitted by the candidate Mr. Maulik Vyas for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the faculty of Arts of Saurashtra University, Rajkot, under my direct guidance and supervision. The present work is original and independent and no part of this thesis has been submitted for any other degree or diploma. Signature of the Guide: Professor Avadhesh Kumar Singh Director, Rajkot School of Translation Studies, Date: IGNOU, New Delhi Contents Sr. Title Page Preface 1-7 Introduction 8-35 Philosophical Theories 13 Episteme of Word 16 Poetry, Truth, and Logic 23 Literature as an Order 32 Ch.1 Epistemology of Knowledge in Indian and Western 36-168 Knowledge Systems I Western Epistemology 37 I.1 Greek Philosophy 40 I.2 Rationalism 66 I.3 Empiricism 68 I.4 Humean Theory of Causation 78 I.5 Kantian Synthesis 81 I.5.a Kant’s Theory of Knowledge 84 I.5.b Categories 90 I.5.c Causation 93 I.6 A View from an ‘Overman’ 98 I.7 Language Philosophy 99 I.8 Darwinist Deconstruction 101 II Indian Epistemology 106 II.a Antiquity of Darśanas 107 II.1 A View of Darśanas 111 II.2 Causal Doctrines in Indian Epistemology 117 II.2.1 Kāśaida’s Critique of Causal 122 Doctrine II.2.2 Analysis of Satkāryavāda 123 II.2.3 Analysis of Asatkāryavāda 125 II.2.4 Analysis of Pratityasamutpāda 128 II.2.5 Analysis of Vivartavāda 132 II.3 Nyāya-Vaiśesika 136 II.3.1 Padārthas: Epistemological 138 Categories II.4 Prāmānyavāda and Khyātivāda: Theories 141 of Valid Cognition and Error II.4.1 Classification of Pratyaksa Jñāna 145 II.4.2 Śabda (Verbal Testimony) 155 a. Nyāya View 156 b. Vaiśesika View 157 c. Mīmāmsā View of Prabhākara 158 d. Mīmāmsā View of Kumārila 159 e. Jaina & Buddhist views 161 Ch.2 Cosmology and Metaphysics of Literature in Indian 169-255 and Western Traditions 1. Taxonomic Musings in Literary Discourse 170 I Western Literary Taxonomy 172 II Indian Literary Taxonomy (with 187 Generic Models) 2. Criteria for Classification 199 3. Taxonomy of the Domains of Knowledge in 204 Kāvyamīmāmsā 4. Structural Divisions in Narrative Ecologies of the 214 Indian and Western Literary Traditions Ch.3 Literature as Knowledge and Knowledge of Literature 256-347 I Western Aesthetics 262 I.1 Logical Cause and Production Cause 264 I.1.1 Appropriate 266 I.1.2 Able 266 I.1.3 Beneficial 267 I.1.4 Aesthetic Pleasure 267 I.2 Representational Aesthetics 270 I.3 Aesthetic and Ecstasy 274 I.4 Aesthetic Qualities and Stasis 276 I.5 Aesthetic as Disinterested Pleasure 284 I.6 Romantic Aesthetics 288 I.7 Beauty and Sublime 290 I.8 Beauty as Ennobling Force 295 I.9 Resistance to Classification of Aesthetics 298 I.10 Hegel’s Aesthetics 305 I.11 Dissent 309 II Indian Aesthetics 313 II.1 Rasa Mīmāmsā 315 II.1.1 Abhinavagupta’s Analysis 323 II.1.2 Aesthetic Object and Its 331 Experience II.1.3 Abhinavagupta’s Views on 334 Kāvya II.2 Modern Views 337 II.2.1 Skeptical Views 341 Ch.4 Conclusion 348-384 I.1 Objections to Literature 351 I.1.a Categorical Criteria for 352 Contentions I.2 Means of Creativity 353 Responses to the Objections I.3 Figurative Language 355 I.4 Appearances 361 I.4.a Logical Inference, Figurative Analogy 366 and Illustration I.5 Literary Telos 373 Appendix Towards a Model for Integral Knowledge 378 Bibliography 385 PREFACE While working on the enriching course of Indian and Western poetics meandering through different concepts and schools—nascent and fully developed like alamkāra, guna-dosa, rīti, vakrokti, dhvani and rasa, as well as postulations made in the Greek philosophy, I saw that Indian culture of knowledge reached its zenith in Rājaśekhara (c 10 AD). His samgraha text Kāvyamimāmsā, constructed on the discoursal principles of mimāmsā tradition, involved a śāstraic rigour of organization, analysis and dissemination of knowledge on kāvya that formed my critique as an M. Phil. dissertation under able guidance of Professor Avadhesh Kumar Singh. This study lured me into the broader issues of literature as knowledge and knowledge of literature as conceived of sporadically in both the Indian and Western literary traditions. The present doctoral thesis, as it were, I acknowledge to be an extension of my work on Rājaśekhara that verily afforded the analytical modalities employed in the present thesis. This study concerning literature as knowledge may well be seen as a post hoc event after stirring up the history of ideas. Literary practice and its critical understanding have a prolonged and distinct past in both the Indian and Western knowledge cultures. The accounts of literary history in both the 2 counterparts amply exhibit how literature, as a seat of knowledge (vidyāsthāna) has availed with a systematic account of its nature and the methods for analysing it. This is, historically speaking, the first character of theory in literary discourse. The word ‘theory’ in literature, albeit, signifies today much more than this. The term theory indicates a general understanding of something in abstract and speculative terms arrived at after examining the function and constitution of the given phenomenon. Theorizing involves discovering complex relations of a systematic kind among numerous counterparts. A theoretical framework promises valid knowledge on its own premise of its subject irrespective of localities of historical time and varying instances of its subject in different knowledge cultures. However, the history of ideas shows that theorizing must follow the event. All good theoretical works in Indian and Western traditions have been preceded by a very buoyant time of creative practices of first order. Theory is then speculation on the basis of the evidence. The overarching term ‘literary theory’ encompasses within its fold ‘critical theory’ and ‘literary theory’. The critical theory predicates on ideological positions and at times conceives of literature with redemptive powers. The literary theory, on the other hand, leads one to the domain of epistemology of knowledge and discoursal devices; metaphysics and cosmology of literature in Indian and Western knowledge systems, which are 3 the sole constituents in the present dissertation. In the philosophical traditions of India and the West, some concerns pertaining to ‘ability to know’, ‘knowing’, ‘knowledge’, ‘knowables’, and ‘end of knowledge’ have been approached with diverse positions. The present study in its course aims to undertake the following: To enquire into the Indian and Western traditions of epistemology and their consequent impact on literary concepts and theoretical principles in a comparative manner. To analyze a systemic construction of taxonomic frameworks in Indian and the Western literary traditions. To critique the aesthetic in Indian and Western conceptual frameworks. This would involve concerns such as defining the aesthetic, the art; chronological study of aesthetics, resistance to classification of the aesthetic, nature of aesthetic experience, sublime and beautiful, and similarities and dissimilarities between Indian and western concepts and categories of the aesthetic. To consider the ontological status of literature in the respective knowledge traditions by focusing on the attacks on and defences of poetry. Further, to know how literary discourse distinguishes itself 4 from other verbal discourses such as science, sociology, history, philosophy among others. It is hoped that the present study, while operating from the premise of literary theory and not critical theory, would postulate and critique the necessary departures and interventions in the history of knowledge traditions of the West and India and thereby arrive at a wider perspective of the issue. I take this opportunity to end the prefatory note by acknowledging the contributions of all who made this study possible. I, first and foremost, express my truest gratitude to my guru Professor Avadhesh Kumar Singh, Director, School of Translation Studies, IGNOU, New Delhi, and my Supervisor, who initiated me into the world of academics. His perceptive and caring guidance has formed and sustained me as a research scholar and human being in this frustrating yet elating pursuit of the research.