Littérature scientifique sur le sujet « Abhinava Gupta »

Abhinav Gupta of Kenan-Flagler Business School, UNC Chapel Hill reviews “The Market Power of Technology: Understanding the Second Gilded Age” by Mordecai Kurz. The Econlit abstract of this book begins: “Examines the relationship between economic inequality and the technological market power of firms, considering its policy implications in light of the history of income and wealth inequality since 1889.”

Rasa is an aesthetic feeling aroused in the reader or spectator when he witnesses an effective presentation of art. Sage Bharata in ancient India pioneered and Abhinav Gupta elaborated the theory of Rasa. According to the Rasa Sutra, rasa nispattih is a result of the conjunction of vibhāva, anubhāva, and Vyābhicāribhāva, which appeals to the Sthāyibhāva and leads to rasa realization. Hayavadana is a two-act play, originally written in Kannada by Girish Karnad. He himself has translated the play Hayavadana in English. There are two stories, one is of two best friends, Kapila and Devadatta, and a lady named Padmini, another is about a horse headed man- in search of completeness. Author has used various dramatic techniques like, Narrator/ Sutradhar, Puppets, Use of masks, and subplots. Any literary work consists of Rasa in it. In this research paper, the researcher wishes to study Hayavadana in the light of Rasa Theory. This play has already been studied from different perspectives like myth, realism, identity crisis, portrayal of woman, and incompleteness. There is a scope to study this Indian work of art in English from the point of view of Indian Poetics, specifically Rasa Theory.

प्रस्तुत लेख पूर्र्वीय साहित्यशास्त्रमा सर्वाधिक चिन्तन र बहस भएको भरतमुनिले प्रतिपादन गरेको रससूत्रको मतान्तर सहितको विवेचनामा केन्द्रित रहेको छ । भरतमुनिले विभाव, अनुभाव र व्यभिचारी भावको संयोगबाट रस निष्पत्ति हुन्छ भनी प्रस्तुत गरेको रससूत्रलाई उनका उत्तरवर्र्ती भट्टलोल्लट, श्रीशंकुक,भट्टनायक र अभिनवगुप्त जस्ता रस चिन्तकहरुले व्याख्या गरे । यी व्याख्याताका व्याख्या आआफ्ना मतानुसारी छन् । तिनमा मतैक्य छैन। भरतले आफ्नो रससूत्रमा रस के हो ? यसको स्वरुप कस्तो हुन्छ ? भन्ने उल्लेख नगरी रस कसरी उत्पन्नहुन्छ भन्ने बारेमा मात्र उल्लेख गरेका छन् । यही आधारमा टेकेर उत्तरवर्र्ती आचार्यहरु मध्ये भट्टलोल्लटले रस उत्पत्ति हुने, श्रीशंकुकले रस अनुमिति हुने, भट्टनायकले भुक्ति हुने र अभिनवगुप्तले अभिव्यक्ति हुने भनी व्याख्या गरेका छन् । यी उत्तरवर्र्ती आचार्यहरूको व्याख्या मूलतः रससूत्रमा प्रयुक्त “संयोगात्” र “निष्पत्ति” दुई शब्दको व्याख्यामा आधारित रहेर आआफ्ना दार्शनिक चेतको मूल्यसमेत प्रतिबिम्बित हुने गरी आएका छन् । यीव्याख्यालाई चिन्तन र व्यावहारिकताका कसीमा राखेर हेर्दा पाठकले काव्य नाटक वा साहित्यको अध्ययन आनन्दप्राप्त गर्नका लागि गर्ने र त्यो आनन्द मुख्य विषयको साधारणीकरण भई व्यष्टिबाट समष्टिमा गई रसास्वादनप्राप्त गर्दछ भन्ने देखिन्छ। रससूत्रमा आएका संयोग र निष्पत्ति शब्दलाई लिएर चारजनाले प्रस्तुत गरेको व्याख्याको अर्थ के हो र तीमध्ये सबैभन्दा व्यावहारिक वा उपयुक्त अर्थ कुन हुनसक्छ भन्ने विषयलाई समेत प्रस्तुत गरिएकोछ । साथै रस केमा रहन्छ र त्यो रसको आस्वाद कसलाई प्राप्त हुन्छ भन्ने प्रश्न एकातिर रहिरहन्छ भने अर्कोतिरसंयोग र निष्पत्तिको मुख्यार्थ के हो भन्ने विषयमा फरक चर्चा परिचर्चा उत्पन्न हुन्छ र यसले रसनिष्पत्ति सिद्धान्तग्रहण गर्न पुग्दछ । यही रसनिष्पत्ति सिद्धान्तको चर्चा यसमा गरिएको छ । विशेष गरी चारवटा आचार्यकाव्याख्यालाई आधार मानेर तत्सम्बन्धी मतमतान्तर र व्याख्याको आशयलाई यसमा प्रस्तुत गरिएको छ l {The present article focuses on the most thought-provoking and debated discourses in Eastern literature, including the dissertation of Rasasutra. The Rasasutra presented by Bharat Muni that juice is derived from the coincidence of perception, experience and adulterous emotion was interpreted by his successors like Bhattalollat, Srishankuk, Bhattanayak and Abhinav Gupta. The interpretations of these lecturers are according to their own opinions. He has no consensus. What is the juice in Bharat's Rasasutra? What does it look like? They have only mentioned how the juice is produced without mentioning it. On this basis, Bhattalollat, one of the later Acharyas, has explained that juice originates, Sreesanku gives juice, Bhattanayaka gives bhukti, and Abhinav Gupta gives expression. The interpretation of these later Acharyas is based on the interpretation of the two words "coincidence" and "decision" used in the Rasasutra and reflects the value of their philosophical consciousness. Putting these interpretations in the context of contemplation and practicality, it seems that the reader enjoys the study of poetic drama or literature for the sake of enjoyment, and that enjoyment becomes a generalization of the main subject and goes from individual to collective. What is the meaning of the explanation given by the four of them regarding the word coincidence and decision in Rasasutra and also what is the most practical or suitable meaning among them? At the same time, the question remains as to what the juice is and who gets the taste of that juice, on the one hand, and on the other hand, what is the main purpose of coincidence and decision? This is the principle of rationality discussed in it. In particular, based on the four Acharya interpretations, the meaning of the dissent and interpretation is presented in it.}