STUDIES OF KUTTIKRISHNA MARAR ON SANSKRIT WORKS Thesis Submitted to Sree Sankaracharya University of Sanskrit, Kalady. in fulfillment of the requirement for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Sanskrit Sahitya PUSHPALATHA P V DEPARTMENT OF SANSKRIT SAHITYA FACULTY OF SANSKRIT LITERATURE SREE SANKARACHARYA UNIVERSITY OF SANSKRIT KALADY-2019 Dr. DHARMARAJ ADAT, Professor, (Retd) Sree Sankaracharya University of Sanskrit, Kalady, Kerala. CERTIFICATE This is to certify that, this thesis entitled ‘STUDIES OF KUTTIKRISHNA MARAR ON SANSKRIT WORKS’ submitted by PUSHPALATHA P V, Research Scholar, Department of Sanskrit Sahitya, Sree Sankaracharya University of Sanskrit, Kalady, for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Sanskrit Sahitya, is a record of bonafied research carried out by her under my supervision. It has not been previously submitted for any Degree/ Diploma/ Fellowship/ Associateship or any other title of this or any other University. Kalady, Dr. DHARMARAJ ADAT 30-12-2019 DECLARATION I, PUSHPALATHA P.V., Research Scholar, Department of Sanskrit Sahitya, Sree Sankaracharya University of Sanskrit, Kalady, hereby declare that the present thesis entitled ‘STUDIES OF KUTTIKRISHNA MARAR ON SANSKRIT WORKS’, submitted to Sree Sankaracharya University of Sanskrit, Kalady, for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Sahitya, is an account of the original research work carried out by me. I further declare that the same has not previously been submitted to any other University or academic body for the award of any of Degree/ Diploma/ Fellowship/ Associateship or other similar title or recognition. Kalady, PUSHPALATHA P.V. 30-12-2019 I Preface Kuttikrishna Marar, equally excellent in Malayalam and Sanskrit is the most profound personality among the trinity in modern Malayalam criticism. M P Paul, one of the three, vanished behind the curtain after having cemented a healthy theoretical foundation to criticism at the age of forty eight. For a quarter of century, Marar and Mundassery played their role very actively in criticism. Mundassery moved along with the artistic development whose literary concepts were influenced by both western and eastern writers. Marar manifested original and self-acquired viewpoints. Iconoclasm sharpened his unique genius, a brave method which no other critic dared to experiment with. They were different in criticism. But all the three always embraced on values of life and right and wrong. This is common in their criticism. Kuttikrishna Marar irked conservative scholars and progressive literary men simultaneously. Many studies have appeared on the personality and literary works of Marar. Some of them are remarkable written by P S Radhakrishnan, M T Sulekha, Thomas Mathew, M N Karasseri, and Govinda Marar. But a Sanskrit-centered study of Marar and his works has not yet been produced and presented. So the relevance of such a study could not be II unimportant. This is a grave endeavour to bring out Marar’s extraordinary treatment with Sanskrit literature. Aims of Research The primary aim of this research is to evaluate holistically the complete works of Marar. This thesis tries to reveal the importance of his period of living, the inspiration he got from former poets, influence of other poets in Malayalam and Sanskrit, relationship and similarity with the contemporaries, variety of plots, method of criticism, style, message, the propriety of literature and criticism and the aims of translation. No man is an island. Marar as a writer did not keep away from the society. This is also an attempt to reveal his share in social reformation. To observe generally the works of Marar in Sanskrit and Malayalam, bring to light unpublished works and uncollected works hither to undiscovered, and disclose the individual excellence as is reflected in his literary productions are the secondary aims. Scheme of Study The primary sources of this study are the published and unpublished works of Marar. In addition to his articles and interpretations various sources like studies on Marar have been made use of for writing the thesis. Some of Marar’s unpublished works are being found from his related families and collected. His diary notes are also III used in this research. A number of books from Kerala Sahitya Academy, Appanthamburan Memorial Museum and other libraries are referred to. The great share of this work is of critical approach and the rest is narrational. This attempt progresses in the path of analysis, biographic inquiry and criticism. This thesis is divided into six chapters. The first chapter deals with Marar’s milieu, especially his literary background. Epics and myths overwhelm with stories of miracles and hyperboles. Marar demolished the existing approach to such works through epic evaluation. He upturned the insipid, narrow and conservative concepts traditional scholars in his Bh¡rataparya¶ana. The second chapter attempts to review on his observations, literary philosophy and criticism. The third chapter debates on how Marar reproduced the works of K¡lid¡sa as a critic, interpreter and translator. The works of K¡lid¡sa, no doubt, was profoundly stimulated influenced Marar to a great level. The fourth chapter highlights his studies about other Sanskrit works. Chapter five deals with his poetic studies. It specially explains how Kuttikrishna Marar re-introduced the K¡vy¡numiti of Mahimabha¶¶a in Sanskrit literary criticism. The conclusion, sixth chapter presents the inferences and finding arrived at. I express my sincere gratitude to my guide Dr. Dharmaraj Adat. IV Professor (Rtd), former Head of the Department of Sanskrit Sahitya, Sree Sankaracharya University of Sanskrit, Kalady, whose immense support and valuable guidance helped me realize my dream of research. I would like to extend my sincere thanks to Dr. P.V Narayanan, Professor and Head of the Department of Sanskrit Sahitya, Sree Sankaracharya University of Sanskrit, Kalady. I also express my gratitude to all teachers of the Sanskrit Sahitya Department. Mr. Muraleedharan, son of Kuttikrishna Marar, grandson Sathya Narayanan, and others for their incredible support for the completion of my research work. Unpublished works of Kuttikrishna Marar were collected from the libraries such as Sahitya Academy Thrissur, Appan Thampuran Smaraka library Ayyanthol, Chinmaya International Foundation Veliyanad and Sree Sankaracharya University of Sanskrit library. I extend my sincere thanks to all librarians and authorities who helped me to reach my goal. Last but not the least, express my deep sense of gratitude to my parents, my husband, family members and friends who helped me physically, mentally and morally for the fulfillment of my research work. Pushpalatha P. V CONTENTS Page Preface I-IV Chapter –One 1-35 Literary Background of Kuttikrishna Marar Chapter –Two 36-79 Studies on Epic by Kuttikrishna Marar Chapter –Three 80-127 Studies on Translated Works of K¡lid¡sa by Marar Chapter –Four 128-149 Studies of Marar on other Sanskrit Works Chapter –Five 150-167 Studies of Marar on Sanskrit Poetics Chapter – Six 168-182 Conclusion Bibliography 183-196 Appendix 197-201 Marar’s Manuscript CHAPTER ONE LITERARY BACKGROUND OF KUTTIKRISHNA MARAR Chapter one Literary Background of Kuttikrishna Marar Introduction Kuttikrishna Marar modified the existing concepts of literature with his innate and acquired ingenuity. His education was traditional, but he was not totally immersed in it, yet he got vitality from it and introduced novel viewpoints. His literary activities could reinstall the former orthodoxical nature of literary criticism. Marar dealt criticism with an independent mind and a different method which evaluated literary works in a varied way. He took into account the life-oriented sphere of literature and made it all the more conspicuous. He challenged the existing mode of criticism and, consequentially he was called an iconoclast. Ofcourse, there was criticism before Marar, but the lion share of it was pedantry. It was a blunt imitation of Sanskrit rhetoricians. Such a method failed in uncurtaining the spirit or essence of literature because of preconcepts and prejudice. This tendency was changed with the advent of Marar. A harmony of scholarship and propriety, and above all an aesthetic appreciation are clearly visible in this 1 prodigy. So whatever he wrote was a new experience to the readers. He demonstrates his own visions on grammar, metre as well as criticism. It toppled the narrow, hereditary and unquestionable literary ideas. Naturally, he encountered tooth and nail opposition from the conservative litterateurs. In the beginning of Marar‘s S¡hityabh£Àa¸a itself, we hear comments on this opposition. A group argues that Marar has written S¡hityabh£Àa¸a in order to resist Bh¡À¡bh£Àa¸a. Yet another group opines that it is an enlargement of Bh¡Àabh£Àa¸a, so much so that a follower of A R Rajaraja Varma. But his literary critical individuality was never to propitiate either of the two. On the contrary, it was based on his spontaneous reasoning power and skill of appreciation. Here we may recall the opinion of Thayattu Sankaran in his Teraµµe¶uttaprabandha´´al, ―After a long term of study and contemplation, and after acquiring maturity through experiences of life, he assimilated them, formed his literary theory, and only then Marar entered into the realm of literature‖(1990:76). The crux of Marar‘s literary criticism is experience from life, it is his treasure- house. Marar suggests that whatever written should be touching life. Take his studies about epics in the forefront, then the depth of his 2 theory of criticism becomes all the more opulent. He writes in his S¡hityasall¡pa ―A poet needs be an artist in one quarter, in the other three he should be the sign of the betterment of humanity‖(1999:72). Whatever he said about literature was inseparably inter-related with life. Marar congruously joined artistic expressions and the intensity of life so that he could be an advocate of ‗Art is Life‘. Though Malayalam literature was flourished in the 20th century, yet the writers and critics did not consider it seriously.