Early History of the Vaishnava Faith and Movement in Bengal, from Sanskrit and Bengali Sources c11.s2.1

c11.s2.1

We have already given² a brief description of the early Sanskrit biographical works of Murāri-gupta and Paramānanda Kavikarṇapūra, which became the precursors of the voluminous and exuberant Bengali biographical narratives, and indicated their value as historical documents. Apart from the fact that they are all written from the excessively zealous devotional point of view, the credulity of which is amazing, it is well known that factual or even ideal accuracy was never a *sine qua non* of this type of composition in Sanskrit³. There never prevailed any tradition of meticulous chronicling or critical appreciation and interpretation of historical facts as such. These writings undoubtedly contain historical material, but the extent and value of such material are immensely variable. Meant more for literary edification than for sober knowledge, they could never divest themselves of their legendary and poetic associations; and this is seen in their complacent confusing of fact and fiction, in their general indifference to the realities of characterisation, in their intermingling of divine and human action, in their unhesitating belief in magic and miracle and in their deep faith in incalculable human destiny. Apart from an attractive philosophy or artistic setting, ordinary history or biography is, indeed, a rather prosaic idea. As a matter of research, it aims at knowledge of facts; as an idea, it professes to bring out larger principles governing human affairs; as a method, its leaning is towards objective accuracy. It is, thus, entirely out of harmony with the super-individual spirit of Sanskrit literature, and could not be disciplined by its formal conception of art. The writers, therefore, never felt uneasy; because the tradition never ordained any deep or objective interest in mere fact or incident, but it even authorised unrestrained fancy or overdressed fiction. Both theory and practice established that works, which dealt with facts of experience or had a biographical and historical content, did not require any specialised form or method, but should be considered only as types of the Kāvya and be embellished with all its characteristic graces, refinements and elaborate elegancies. The fact of having an historical or biographical theme seldom makes a difference; they are Kāvyas, poems or dramas in all essentials, and should be regarded as such. The authors, therefore, claim merit, not for historiography, but for poetry. As poets, they need not keep within the limits of ascertained or ascertainable verities, nor need they worry if the slender thread of actual history is buried under a mass of luxuriant poetry or poetical exaggeration. The incidents and characters are all lifted from the sphere of matter-of-fact knowledge to the region of fancy and fable; and we have here, in the normal tradition of the Kāvya, the same general scheme and method, the same descriptive digressions and the same ornate manner and diction. Even if an historical personage is taken as the central figure, the laudatory accounts poetically magnify and surround him with all the glory and glamour of a legendary hero.