Kavi-Karnapiira alias Parmananda-dasa Sena hailed from Bengal and was a well known Vaishnava belonging to the Vaidya family. He was son of ‘iva".nanda. From the study of his works it is evident that he was a Vaimava of the Gaudin." sect. and an ardent follower of Chaitanya, the founder oe the sect. He composed a poem Caitanya Caritanirtam in a metrical form which depicts the life of Caitanya MahAprabhu. Besides he wrote a drama Chaitanya. Candrodaya on the life of Caitanya. By birth he inherited the tradition of Vaiwa thought for his father g'iva.- nanda was an older disciple of Caitanya and used to organize and lead the devotees of Caitanya to Puri from 13angal. As the author writes in the colophon that his drama Caitanya Candrodaya was written in Saka 1494 or 1501=1572 or 1579 A.D., his date can thus be determined round about the middle of 16th century. Rajendralal Mitra who edited his drama Caitanya Candrodaya says in introduction that Kavi-Karnapilra was born in 1524 A.D. at Kancanapalli in Nadiya a few year before Caitanya's death.
Kavi Karnapiira belongs to the galaxy of Vairava authors like Rupa and Jiva Goswami who through their deep devotion to Lord gri Krgia attempted to bring Vai§nava ideas to bear upon the general theme of poetic Rasa and endeavored to establish Bhatia as supreme relish able sentiment.
(a) Caitanya Caritamrtam a poem in metrical form on the life of Caitanya. It was published from Murshidabad (Bangal) in 1884.
(b) (I) Caitanya Candrodaya-a drama on the life of Caitanya. It was edited by Rajendralal Mitra and was published in Bibl. Indi. 1854.
(II)-Ed. by Kedarnath & Wasudeva Laxman Shastri : Nirnaya Sagar Press, 1906.
(III)-Ed. by Haridasa Sharma, Vrndavana, 1957.
(c) (I) Alartdcdra Kaustubha-a work on poetics. It was pub-lished with the commentary of Vigvandtha Cakravartin from Murshidabad in 1899 in Bengali characters. SivaPrasad Bhattacharya also edited Alarpkara Kaustubha with an anonymous commentary with his own glass. Varendra Research Society, Rajshahi published it in Deva Nagri character in 1923.
(II)-Ed. Puridasa, Vrndavana 1955 (Bengali Script.)
Commentaries. S.K. De in H.S.P. (P.257) gives the list of commentaries on Alartikara Kaustubha as follows :
(1) Sara-Boddini by Vigvanatha Cakravartin.
(2) Tipani by Sarvabhauma, pupil of Cakravartin.
(3) D-dhiti prakaika by Vrndavanacandra Tarkalarnkara Cakravartin, son of Radha-Carana Kavindra Cakravartin.
(4) Tad by Lokanatha Cakravartin.
Among the Vaimava works on Sanskrit Poetics the Alarpkara Kaustubha of Kavi-Karnaptira has been held in high esteem as is evident from the following verse composed in its honour wherein the Alariikara Kaustubha is compared with the Kaustubha jewel which is gracefully worn by Lord gri Krishna on his chest. The verse says.
The work is very comprehensive in nature and deals with in ten Kiranas all the important topics of Sanskrit Poetics except dramaturgy. 1. Kavya Samagri 2. Sabdartha 3. Dhvani 4. Gun. ibhiltavyarigya 5. Rasa-Blia.vatadbheda 6. Gurjas 7. abdalaiiikaras 8. ArthalariikAras 9. Riti 10. Dosa.
1st Kirana opens with the benedictory verse in which the blessing of Lord Sri Krsna are invoked. The author defines poetry as which means that poetry is comprised of a creation made by a poet's speech. Stepping into the shoes of Vigvanatha, the author of the Sahitya Darpana, he criticises the definition of poetry given by Mammata, Vamana and even by Vigvanatha and in the end establishes the validity of his own definition of poetry. Mammata's definition is too wide Ativyapta as on account of the absence of blemishes and the presence of excellances and figures of speech it will be applicable to such sentences-Kuranganayand etc. which are not regarded as kavya. Vigvanatha's definition vakya kavyam too is inappropriate for the following verse according to the norms laid down by Vigvanath is not vakya as there is no compatibility here which is the essentigreharacteristic of a vakya. But the verse is admitted kavya all. Says he kavyadarshana. The sentence will be included within the scope of poetry on account of the depiction of feeling of love whereas the status of poetry is denied to such expressions. Hence the definition propounded by Vigvanatha is vitiated by both the fallacies of the too wide and too narrow definition (Ativyapti and Avyapti). Vamana's definition is also not acceptable for Riti is an external appendage and does not form the inner content of poetry.
Book's Sample Pages
Your email address will not be published *
Send as free online greeting card
Email a Friend