1,720,961 research outputs found
A possible deliberate Mahābhārata-echo in the imagery of the Buddhacarita compounded-rūpakas
Full text linkThe main focus of the paper is to tentatively document traces of hypertextuality between the Buddhacarita and the Mahābhārata, under the assumption that Aśvaghoṣa probably knew this latter work, albeit non-definitive version of it. The selected methodological approach is a comparison between Bc and MBh in-compound-rūpakas. Indeed, since it is plausible that he benefited from an erudite court audience, Aśvaghoṣa is here assumed to take for granted that even indirect hints at MBh passages would be promptly understood. Therefore, he sometimes re-uses Mahābhārata expressions, and merely changes the word-order or replaces a single constituent in the matching figurative phrases or compounds, and sometimes plays with the MBh rūpakas in a more complex way. On the basis of the survey and analysis of all the Bc’s rūpakas and their supposed inspirational MBh source, the present inquiry tries to show how the singled-out cross-references are not only aimed at building a generic sophisticated literary pattern for his mahākāvya and his learned audience, but they are also intentionally targeted at evoking Epic heroic imagery as clues for the kingly commitment the author attributes to Buddha
I discorsi di Mandodarī e Draupadī: locuzioni retoriche a confronto
Full text linkNell’epica indiana l’arte oratoria è tenuta in grande considerazione ed è propria di figure maschili di rilievo. Al centro del presente articolo sono Draupadī e Mandodarī, accomunate dall’essere votate alla fedeltà e devozione al loro sposo (pativratā), ma distinte dall’essere legate l’una a un eroe vincitore e l’altra a un antieroe. Entrambe sono attrici principali di un episodio d’intenso pathos narrativo, quando esortano e/o rimproverano i rispettivi coniugi sull’agire (o non agire) in un determinato modo (MBh 3.28-33; R [G] 6.33; R [B] 6.99). Alcuni versi del Rāmāyaṇa in cui Mandodarī redarguisce Rāvaṇa ormai morto, espunti dall’edizione Baroda ma in parte conservati in Gorresio, si sono rivelati utilmente confrontabili con il discorso che Draupadī rivolge a Yudhiṣṭhira nel terzo libro del Mahābhārata. Poiché non è noto alcun tentativo di condurre un’analisi contrastiva della dialettica delle due protagoniste e, in particolare, dei passi selezionati, oggetto della presente ricerca sarà un’analisi di alcune strategie retorico-stilistiche adottate nella rappresentazione letteraria di Mandodarī e Draupadī.In the Indian epic, oratory is held in high regard and is a characteristic of prominent male characters. The present paper focuses on Draupadī and Mandodarī who share the qualities of loyalty and devotion to their spouses (pativratā), but differ in that one is bound to a conquering hero, the other to an antihero. Both of them are the protagonists of an episode of intense narrative pathos, when they exhort and/or admonish their respective spouses to act or for not having acted in a specific manner (MBh 3.28-33; R [G] 6.33; R [B] 6.99). A few lines from the Rāmāyaṇa depicting Mandodarī scolding the deceased Rāvaṇa, expunged from the Baroda edition but partly preserved in Gorresio, have proved useful for comparisons with Draupadī’s speech to Yudhiṣṭhira from the third book of the Mahābhārata. To the best of my knowledge, no attempt has been made to perform an exhaustive comparison of the two protagonists’ dialectics or even these selected passages. Therefore, the objective of the present research is to analyse some of the rhetorical-stylistic strategies employed in the literary representation of Mandodarī and Draupadi
Prospects of intertextual relations between Aśvaghoṣa’s Buddhacarita and Saundarananda rhetorical-stylistic forms and epic sources
Full text linkAśvaghoṣa (1st-2nd century CE) is the earliest known author of Indian poetry (kāvya) and a major contributor to the Brahmanical and Buddhist cultural and literary heritage. Nevertheless, we still do not have a clear picture of the sources that may have primarily influenced the composition of his works - namely the two court epic poems (Mahākāvya) Saundarananda 'Handsome Nanda' and Buddhacarita 'Acts of the Buddha' - and even less certain are the ways in which Aśvaghoṣa may have interacted with the epics, viz. e. the Mahābhārata 'The Great Bhārata' and the Rāmāyaṇa 'Rāma's Path'. Although the contribution of epic sources to his works has often been debated in the field of cultural-historical reconstruction studies, it has never been approached from a strictly philological-textual perspective. The present study provides a comparison of one hundred stanzas of Aśvaghoṣa's poems and the epic sources to demonstrate that an intertextual philological relationship between them is indisputable. The chosen methodological approach focuses on cross-referencing the main rhetorical and stylistic forms in the epic sources, the so-called alaṃkāras 'ornaments' used in the Mahākāvyas - i.e. the simile (upamā) and the metaphor (rūpaka). It analyses the logical structure of the ornaments that make the poems and epics similar, namely the relationship between the subject of comparison (upameya), the object of comparison (upamāna) and the common property (sādhāraṇadharma). This could help to determine the role that the two epics played in influencing the compositional process of Aśvaghoṣa, both quantitatively and qualitatively. Furthermore, the analysis of cross-references can lead to the identification of the sections from which Aśvaghoṣa may have borrowed. By presenting the most striking case of intertextuality, centred on the ornaments mentioned above, the proposed approach examines the ways in which Aśvaghoṣa seems to rework, adapt and manipulate the epic model from a diachronic perspective. The underlying aim is to shed light on the general framework of the dynamics surrounding the genesis of the Mahākāvya genre itself, which is so intertwined with the epic (Itihāsa)
Per un’analisi preliminare della poiesi di Aśvaghoṣa: fra epica, retorica ed estetica
No full textAśvaghoṣa (I-II C.E.), the multifaceted buddhist author of the mahākāvyas Saundarananda and Buddhacarita, seems to have mastered the rhetorical devices of metaphora in absentia (rūpaka) and simile (upamā) in both of his works. These aspects will become systematised only until much later (VI-VII C.E.) and eventually investigated in contemporary cognitive linguistics studies (Black 1962; Levin 1977; Lakoff 1980). By means of a diachronic and synchronic approach, this article analyses the poetics and poiesis of the author through the lens of intertextuality and the dynamics of literary reuse in South-Asian and Buddhist literature. In this context, applying a synchronic approach means interpreting different types of rūpakas and upamās, foregrounding the author’s self-consciousness on rhetoric and stylistic forms. Similarly, the diachronic approach imposes a bidirectional criterion, namely a) the evaluation of a pre-systematised use of analogy forms in texts belonging to the epic genre (Itihāsa), and b) the assessment on already systematised analogy forms in later canonical alaṃkāraśāstras, from Bhāmaha’s Kāvyālaṃkāra (VII C.E.) to Mammaṭa’s Kāvyaprakāśa (XI C.E.)
Some considerations on the epic usage of traditional Kāvya’s in-compound rūpakas padmamukha- and padmalocana-
No full textIn 1964 Sharma’s “Elements of Poetry in the Mahābhārata” constituted the first attempt to systematically analyse Mahābhārata’s figures of speech and to list several upamānas of similes and metaphors along with their related symbolism. Then, Brockington (1977) studied how Rāmāyaṇa’s textual stratification encompasses some kinds of alaṃkāras at a different level of sophistication.
By taking into account such background, I shall present a Rāmāyaṇa and Mahābhārata-based occurrences’ survey of two renown compounds involving the lotus as upamāna sometimes listed as similes, and I shall propose to interpret them all as samastarūpakas according to classifications of early alaṃkāraśastra theorists (Gerow 1971; Bronner 2007, 2010; Candotti-Pontillo 2017). The compounds and their variants (i.e. mukhāmbuja-; kamalalocana- etc.) recur at varying density: in fact, both Epics register a low frequency of the samastarūpaka ‘lotus/face’ and, for what concerns the Mahābhārata, several occurrences take place in passages excised from the main text of the critical edition. Instead, the samastarūpaka ‘lotus/eye’ is highly recurrent and frequently referred to prominent male characters in different contexts, whereas it is used far less for portraying major and minor female characters.
By showing the collected data, I propose to examine the epic usage of these compounds in order to draw an overview of the texts’ perception and reception of such metaphorical identifications which will later became signature features Kāvya’s symbolism (Smith 2002), especially for what concerns the mahākāvya genre and its origins seemingly linked to itihāsa (Lienhard 1984; Boccali 2008; Sudyka 2011)
Le qualità del guerriero consacrato nell’Udyoga parvan come possibili tracce di un sostrato culturale indoario antico
No full textLo scenario post-vedico trova un riscontro nel Mahābhārata, che pur presentandosi come manifesto ideologico dell’ortodossia brahmanica, contiene elementi di sostrato che già Held (1935) ascrisse alla “sabhā-society” rappresentata dal fenomeno Vrātya. Nell’Udyoga Parvan emerge una società basata su una relazione dicotomica ambigua tra il varṇa dei Brahmani e quello degli Kṣatriya, non esente da reciproche influenze, che restituisce un ritratto dell'“eroe epico” come guerriero-asceta che potrebbe risalire a una realtà pre-ortodossa. Gli studi condotti da Brockington (1998), Harzer (2005), Pontillo (2016) e Vassilkov (2016) hanno dimostrato che il Mahābhārata è un’importante fonte per la ricostruzione del contesto socio-culturale Vrātya di matrice indoaria antica. Pertanto, la presente ricerca, nonostante lo scetticismo di Brodbeck (2009: 9-10) riguardo all’interpretazione dei Veda e del Mahābhārata in chiave storica, tiene conto della direzione intrapresa dagli studi nell’ultimo ventennio, e si focalizza sullo kṣatriyadharma antico sulla base della definizione di guerriero di Kuntī (5.134.15-21), dei passi legati alle qualità ascetiche dei Pāṇḍava (5.22.3-7 e 10-16; ), della presentazione di Yudhiṣṭhira come Dharmarājan (5.22.33-34; 27.7-10) e di Kṛṣṇa come modello divino di guerriero consacrato (5.66.1-15; 70.85-93). Le aspirazioni di tipo ascetico giocano infatti un ruolo importante all'interno di questa società di puruṣottamāḥ, che incarnano molte delle caratteristiche ricostruite per l’antica cultura indoaria dei Vrātya, cosicché i personaggi che vi figurano primeggiano e si distinguono per status e per eccezionali qualità guerriere e ascetico-religiose, che li assimilano più a semidèi che a esseri umani: essenziali sono i modelli insistiti di Nara e Nārāyaṇa, antecedenti dei guerrieri asceti Arjuna e Kṛṣṇa (5.94.14-20; 30-34) e il discorso di Sanatsujāta che accenna alla pratica del Brahmacarya (5.42.2-11; 44.3-4 e 14-17), da intendersi nel senso di “sequela del Brahman” avvalorato da Neri-Pontillo (2016)
A possible Mahābhārata-echo in the nature centred rūpakas of Buddhacarita
No full textThe purpose of the present inquiry is to analyze how the cross-references to the Mahābhārata in the Buddhacarita are not only a learned literary pattern, but rather clues for the kingly commitment Aśvaghoṣa gives to Buddha. The latter is achieved by means of the imagery the poet involves, which results as being a mixture of Epic heroic poetry with the typical naturally-oriented repertoire of the Kāvya fomulas. Indeed he plays an endless game with his audience, for instance by adopting some compounds including the regal animal siṃha (e.g. siṃhagati BC 1.15, siṃhanāda BC 5.84), which respectively occur as epithets and attributes, combined with the names of the most famous heroes or princes in the Mahābhārata (e.g. MBh 6.49.27.1; 6.50.88.2; 7.99.20.2; 7.131.8.2; 7.145.6.2; 7.171.61.3; 8.19.12.2 and 9.12.24.2). He sometimes even literally re-uses Mahābhārata sentences, and merely changes the word-order or replaces a single constituent in the matching figurative phrases or compounds, such as in BC 1.69, where mohatamas sounds as a sophisticated reference to tamomoha occurring in MBh 3.160.22.1, or in BC 9.1, where bāṣpapratodābhihitau, “hit by the whip of tears” is a self-evident inspired remake of vākyapratodābhihato, “hit by the whip of words” (MBh 1.2.156)
Τόποι retorici nei discorsi di due pativratā: Mandodarī e Draupadī a confronto
No full textNell’epica indiana l’arte oratoria è tenuta in grande considerazione ed è propria di figure maschili di rilievo, che disquisicono di varie questioni in materia politico-sociale e soprattutto religiosa. Al centro del presente articolo sono invece due personaggi femminili, Draupadī e Mandodarī, mogli di due protagonisti, rispettivamente del Mahābhārata e del Rāmāyaṇa. Accomunate dall’essere votate alla fedeltà e devozione al loro sposo (pativratā), ma distinte dall’essere legate l’una a un eroe vincitore e l’altra a un antieroe, ucciso per la sua malefica caparbietà, entrambe sono attrici principali di un episodio d’intenso πάθος narrativo, quando esortano e/o rimproverano i rispettivi coniugi sull’agire (o non agire) in un determinato modo.
In MBh (P) 3.28-33, Draupadī dà prova della sua eloquenza nei confronti del marito Yudhiṣṭhira, considerato il Dharma personificato, incitandolo all’azione contro la fazione nemica. In R (B) 5.56.66-95 = R (G) 6.33.13-51, Mandodarī esorta Rāvaṇa a riconsegnare Sītā, evitando lo scontro con Rāma, ma senza esito, tanto che la sua seconda prova di eloquenza sarà il lamento funebre per il marito in R (B) 6.99.3-29 = R (G) 6.95.2-41.
Nel tempo, tali passi sono stati interpretati dalla comunità scientifica in maniera omogenea. Hiltebeitel a più riprese (2001; 2011), Shah (2012) ma soprattutto Malinar (2007) hanno condotto analisi letterarie e culturali, per inquadrare Draupadī al di fuori della sua convenzionale connotazione di moglie devota, osservando in MBh 3.28-33 il punto di vista critico di una regina sui diritti e doveri degli kṣatriya. Per quanto concerne i discorsi di Mandodarī, la maggior parte dei lavori critici (e.g. Upadhyay e Jitatmananda, 2001) non si discosta dall’enfatizzare i tratti tradizionali della pativratā.
Poiché non è noto nessun tentativo di condurre un’analisi contrastiva della dialettica dei due passi, l’oggetto della presente ricerca sarà quello di analizzare le strategie retorico-stilistiche adottate nella rappresentazione letteraria di Mandodarī e Draupadī
Speaking the Forbidden: mlecchavāc in Mahābhārata 1.135
Full text linkIn Indian xenology, the term mleccha refers to an individual who does not conform to the social and linguistic norms of the Āryas. Studies have analysed its multiple uses, including its role in toponymy, religious taboos, and ethnicity. The Brahmanical perspective considers the mleccha languages to be distorted versions of Sanskrit, and advocates social and linguistic segregation, including a ban on teaching Sanskrit to non-Āryas. In the Mahābhārata, Vidura secretly uses a mleccha language to foil an assassination plot against the Pāṇḍavas. This episode, which seems to contradict the norm, has been analysed for its narrative significance but not normatively. This paper aims to contribute to the discourse on the normative aspects of the Mahābhārata, particularly with regard to the mlecchas and their cultural assimilation and adaptation, by reinterpreting the episode and asking whether it represents a normative grey area or a justified act
A quête for vengeance Rudra’s involvement in Ambā’s ascetic path and gender transition
No full textIn ancient literature androgynous figures often convey a powerful symbolism of harmony and perfection, because they embody details of both sexes in an archetypal way. In the Ambopākhyāna parvan (MBh 5.170-197.21) is represented a case of gender transition about the Kaśi’s princess Ambā being granted a boon by the often marginalised god Rudra. Several scholars devoted their inquiries to the Ambopākhyāna parvan with regards to the point of view on women’s status. Firstly, Jamison (1996) stated that the narrative core of the Ambopākhyāna’s concerning the prototypical bond between Rudra and Ambā could date back to the Vedic period. Later, Hiltebeitel (2011) agreed with her in acknowledging Rudra’s involvement in Ambā’s ascetic path, for what concerns women’s Dharma on the epic. Analogously, Custodi (2007) aligns his interpretation with these readings, but only to deal with the transsexuality theme which is also the main subject of Chakravarti’s study, even if he interprets Ambā’s austerities as “an attempt to return autonomy to a woman” (2018: 174). As far as I know, however, no one did pay attention to the ambiguities arisen from Ambā undertaking the ascetic path, despite her status of a castaway woman and the crucial detail of how she managed to be granted a very special boon by Rudra himself (cf. Scheuer 1982). Therefore, I suggest some tentative issues to further reconsider the Ambopākhyāna’s episode: even if Ambā’s purpose to perform tapas is consistently hampered, might she be considered a female alter ego of the god Rudra? Why if Ambā’s tapas is deviant, crooked (jihma), still it obtained merits? Finally, could her ascetic merits be related and compared to the boon obtained by Draupadī from Śiva? As regards the cultural milieu of gender subject in the itihāsa, Scheuer (1982) firstly established Śiva’s appearances towards virtuous female characters throughout the MBh, as for example his granting a boon to Draupadī in her previous life
- …
