Chapter 1

Introduction and Background to Sri Aurobindo’s Poetry and Poetics

Poetry I take to be the measured expression of emotion… it is the natural and

predestined blending or rather inseparable existence of great matter with great verse

producing high emotions or beautiful matter with beautiful words producing soft

emotions that gives us genuine poetry. (Sri Aurobindo, CWSA 1: 123)

But Alexander of Macedon & Napoleon Buonaparte were poets on a throne… There are

times when Nature gifts the poetic temperament with a peculiar grasp of the conditions

of action and an irresistible tendency to create their poems not in ink &on paper, but in

living characters & on the great canvas of the world.. (Sri Aurobindo, CWSA 1: 198)

Poetry like everything else in man evolves. (Sri Aurobindo, CWSA 26: 205)

Various definitions of poetry given above were given by Sri Aurobindo at different stages in his

life. The first definition (written during 1898-1901) echoes Wordsworth’s definition of poetry as the

“spontaneous overflow of powerful feelings”. For William Wordsworth it was an “overflow” but for Sri

Aurobindo it was a “measured expression” which is Platonic in approach. However, emotion becomes

the focal point of both the poet-critics. The second definition (composed during 1898-1910) requires

some amount of analysis as the designation of “poets” are given to those who have been great

potentates in the past. In fact this definition gives a much wider dimension to the terms “poet” and

“poetry”. These potentates who strove to govern the world, had the understanding of the conditions of

the world and had the potential to govern. In poetry, a poet moulds the circumstances in his/her own

sensibility and creates his/her world. Similarly these rulers created their own world which Sri Aurobindo

refers to as the tendency to create “living characters & on the great canvas of the world”. Significantly,

“the grasp

of conditions” and the capability to create his/her own world is likely to be poet. And the world he/she

creates becomes poetry.

The third definition (given sometime between 1917 and1920) is rather elusive. If poetry evolves,

then it would always assume a contextual definition. The previous definitions show how for Sri

Aurobindo the meaning of the terms “poet” and “poetry” are contextual and can even assume a wider

dimension. It also indicates that it is difficult to define these terms. Sri Aurobindo has described the

nature of poetry at great length in relation to vision, style, substance, movement and such concepts that

are intimately connected with poetry; his description brings out many definitions of poetry and poets.

Sri Aurobindo’s writings show a progressive approach. He does not restrict the conceptual variation of a

term as is evident from the definitions discussed above. The understanding of the terms, their approach

all evolve with time and content. All the above definitions have their own validity in the context to which

they refer.

This gradual progression, evolution and change of concepts posit some difficulty for the readers

to form a fixed idea about Sri Aurobindo’s views, as may not easily be gained even from Wordsworth,

Shelley and Eliot’s writings. If asked for a definition of poetry, the researcher cannot come up with one

single definition. However, evolution and integration being the basic tenet of Sri Aurobindo’s approach,

the definitions may be contextually understood and applied. It is this complexityi that his writings

present. While rearranging and researching it is difficult to formulate a sequence of descriptions owing

to the difference of the referential point in which they have been written. Yet an attempt has been

made, to study few concepts and present them in various dimensions in Sri Aurobindo’s own

perspectives.

Sri Aurobindo’s writings on aesthetics, poetics and his exegesis on the Veda and Upanishad have

already established him as a poet, critic, aesthetician and translator in the Twentieth Century. He wrote

prodigiously all through his life on various disciplines of knowledge. His writings encompass poetry and

poetics, philosophy, psychology, 3philology, sociology, polity, culture, translation. They show a synthesis

of the thoughts and cultures of the East and the West of which he had intense study and experience. He

was able to amalgamate these two diverse cultural traditions not only on the basis of his study, but

through his spiritual power of which he grew aware quite early in his life. He was a yogi and a seer-poet

(Kavi), one who could envision and act through his spiritual powers.

K.R. Srinivasa Iyengar and A.B. Purani, disciples of Sri Aurobindo, have written about the life of

Sri Aurobindo and have documented few external and literary facts about his life. He wrote, “The

attempt is bound to be a failure… *because+ it has not been on the surface for man to see.” (CWSA 36:

11) Yet, the external facts are important for the researcher to understand the formation of Sri

Aurobindo’s vision in different disciplines.

Sri Aurobindo was born on 15th August 1872 in Calcutta (now Kolkata). He was the third son of

Dr. Krishnadhan Ghose and Swarnalata Devi and was named Aurobindo Ackroydii Ghose. Dr.

Krishnadhan Ghose was an anglophile and was convinced of superiority of English culture over the

Indian. He therefore sent his three sons Benoy Bhushan, Manomohan and Aurobindo to England in

1879, to acquire English Education. At this time Sri Aurobindo was only seven years old. In England he

learnt various classical and modern European languages and read their literature about which he wrote

“He *Sri Aurobindo+ had mastered Greek and Latin, English and French, and has also acquired some

familiarity with the continental languages like German and Italian” (CWSA 36: 28). He had a natural flare

for writing poetry and would easily transcend the common everyday experience in his poems. He grew

up completely unaware of Indian culture as his father had strictly instructed that none of his sons should

have any acquaintance with the Indians living in England. Later however, when Dr. Krishnadhan Ghose

experienced the atrocities of the British in India he sent letters and Newspaper cuttings to his son. Sri

Aurobindo thus grew aware of the political scenario in India. He had passed the Indian Civil Serviceiii

(I.C.S) exam but got himself disqualified for the riding test by not appearing for it. He took the exam

because of his father’s insistence but never felt like pursuing it.

After fourteen years of stay in England Sri Aurobindo returned to India in early 1893. He took up

services at Baroda from 8th February and continued his work till 18th June 1907. During his thirteen years

of stay there, he served in various departments like Survey Settlement Department, Revenue

Department and also taught English and French and was finally appointed as the Vice-Principal of the

Baroda College. Sri Aurobindo had started his spiritual adventures in Baroda and read voraciously about

Indian culture. He also learnt Sanskrit and different modern languagesiv and read literature in them. He

had many spiritual experiences during these years such as the silencing of mind, nirvana, the experience

of Shankaracharya in Kashmir that of passive Brahman and many such spiritual realizations which he

expressed elaborately in his poetry and prose. These experiences have been discussed elaborately in the

third chapter of this study. Sri Aurobindo was writing on various topics and experimenting with various

forms and themes simultaneously. His writings at this time reflect his acquaintance and involvement

with the Indian culture and spirituality.

From 1906 Sri Aurobindo travelled frequently to Bengal. In 1908 he left the service at Baroda

and moved to Calcutta and accepted the editorship of the journal called Bande Mataram and also took

charge of the Bengal National College as Principal. He was trying to create awareness among Indians for

India’s independence and for this he wrote in the journals both in English and Bengali and gave speeches

at various places. He was actively involved in the Nationalist movement and was arrested for sedition

and was soon released. He was again arrested in May 1908 for Alipore bomb case. He was an undertrial

prisoner for one year and was acquitted in May 1909 for the lack of evidence. This one year of solitary

confinement was for him like living in hermitage. He describes it in his account of the prison life – “I have

spoken of a year’s imprisonment. It would have been more appropriate to speak of a year’s living in a

forest, in an ashram or hermitage…The only result of the wrath of the British Government was that I

found God.” (Tales of Prison Life: 1-2). Such was his attitude towards his imprisonment. In this period he

had significant spiritual experiences. One of many experiences that he narrated in the speech at

Uttarpara after his acquittal is the experience of the Vasudeva Darshan. He recounted that he found

Vasudeva, the Lord in every animate and inanimate thing. He realized the spiritual experiences of the

Upanishads and the Gita in the jail itself. He therefore marks this as a gain rather than the loss of a year.

After he was acquitted he started a journal called Karmayogin. The motive of this journal was

similar to that of the Bande Mataram that was to awaken the nation to fight for independence and grow

in National consciousness. For eleven months Sri Aurobindo continued his work in Bengal. In February

1910, he received a command from within himself and left for Chandernagore which was then a French

colony. Soon after, he left for Pondicherry which too was a French colony. He reached Pondicherry on

4th April 1910 and spent the rest of his life there.

Concurrent with his services in Baroda and his political activities in Bengal, Sri Aurobindo was

engaged in literary expression and spiritual pursuits. In his letter dated June 25 1945, he recounts one of

his spiritual experiences in Baroda, “Maharashtrian Yogi, Vishnu Bhaskar Lele… instructed him how to

reach complete silence of the mind and immobility of the whole consciousness. This Sri Aurobindo was

able to achieve in three days with the result of lasting and massive spiritual realizations opening to him

the larger ways of Yoga.” (CWSA 36:91) In another letter he confirms the period of composition of two

poems and wrote, “Vidula” and “Baji Prabhou”… “were conceived and written in Bengal during the time

of political activity” (CWSA 36: 45). However, when he reached Pondicherry his preoccupation was

sādhana and he involved himself completely in it. There were least of outer activities.

Sri Aurobindo never gave up writing; he indulged in replying letters or expressing his spiritual

adventures in prose and poetry. He published a journal called Arya (1914-1921) which was started with

the insistence and collaboration of Mr. and Mrs. Richard. Mr. Richard, a Frenchman, was well versed in

philosophy. Mrs. Richard known as Mirra later became Sri Aurobindo’s collaborator in his sādhana and is

widely known as the Mother. Most of the volumes of the collected works of Sri Aurobindo came into

being because of the composition of the series of essays written by Sri Aurobindo in the journal Arya.

Essays on – The Life Divine, The Synthesis of Yoga, The Secret of the Veda, The Upanishads, Essays on the

Gita, The Human Cycle, The Ideal of Human Unity, The Foundations of Indian Culture and The Future

Poetry all were serialized in the journal. These essays were later collected and published in separate

volumes. They contain the spiritual experiences of Sri Aurobindo and his vision in various disciplines. The

Life Divine is the document of the metaphysical experience whereas The Synthesis of Yoga is the

exposition of the practical side and psychology of Integral yoga. The Human Cycle and The Ideal of

Human Unity are the essays on social and political thought and vision of Sri Aurobindo. Similarly, The

Future Poetry is the critical treatise in which Sri Aurobindo has surveyed the English Poetry and has

envisioned its future course. Each of these collections show a linear development of various aspects and

disciplines of human life from past to present and a possible development in future. Sri Aurobindo

declared the aim of Arya – “to feel out for the thought of the future, to help in shaping its foundations

and to link it to the best and the most vital thought of the past” (CWSA 13: 103).

Sri Aurobindo was aware of the Past by his extensive study and intensive experiences. He was

constantly engaged in studying and experiencing what he read. In reference to the formation of his

philosophy he wrote, “I was never satisfied till experience came and it was on this experience that later

on I founded my philosophy, not on ideas by themselves” (CWSA 36: 113). His experiences were varied

and included many visionary, aural, oral, and other metaphysical and meta-sensorial experiences. He

recorded his experiences, experiments, their successes and failures, essentially between 1909 to1927 in

his diary. As these were his personal records, they were not meant to be published; however, Sri

Aurobindo Ashram Press has published these diary writings in the name “Record of Yoga” in two

volumes (CWSA 10-11). This documentation of Sri Aurobindo’s experiences is now available for the

readers after this publication.

A few of the many experiences that Sri Aurobindo recorded are driṣti, śruti and smriti. About

driṣti he wrote,

Drishti is the faculty by which the ancient Rishis saw the truth of Veda, the direct vision

of the truth without the need of observation of the object, reasoning, evidence,

imagination, memory or any other of the faculties of the intellect. It is as when a man

sees an object and knows what it is, even if, sometimes, he cannot put a name on it; it is

pratyakshadarsana of the satyam. (CWSA10: 17)

Similarly,

A special power of sruti is the revelation of truth through the right & perfect vak

in the thought.

Smriti is the faculty by which true knowledge hidden in the mind reveals itself to

the judgment and is recognised at once as the truth. It is as when a man has forgotten

something he knew to be the fact, but remembers it the moment it is mentioned to him.

(CWSA 10: 17)

These experiences are only a few experiences; others are trikaladrishti, prākamya, viveka, ashtasiddhi

and those stages and states in which he experimented and attained an experience. Sri Aurobindo

labored and strived to gain spiritual experiences through experiments.

driṣti, and śruti, seeing and hearing, are two

faculties of gaining knowledge. This is the jnāna, the Knowledge of Truth through the faculty of inner

sight and inner hearing. These two faculties form an integral part of his poetry and poetics. He speaks

about the importance of these faculties for the creation, organization and appreciation of poetry and

poetics. According to him, the poetry of the highest order, is the mantra which the “seeing speech”; that

which utilizes the faculty of inner sight and inner hearing in its formation, comprehension and

appreciation.

Sri Aurobindo’s concepts of poetry, like philosophy, polity and social thought, have emerged out

of his own experience. He wrote, interpreted and commented on poetry from an inner vision. This vision

facilitated him to see the past, present and future of poetry. His critical treatise – The Future Poetry is a

testimony of his critical insight into the past, present and future of poetry and criticism. He wrote thirty-

two critical essays which were serialized in the journal Arya from December 1917 to July 1920. He began

with the review of Mr. James Cousins’ book – New Ways in English Literature but kept it aside and

focused on the questions raised by Cousins about the future of poetry. This question was taken up by Sri

Aurobindo in the subsequent essays and developed into his critical treatise. Many poets and critics have

described the nature of poetry and its function at length, a few may be referred to here.

Plato approached poetry philosophically and assessed poetry for its moral value. He was against

the kind of poetry which did not help to inculcate moral values and national spirit and dismissed poetry

which was an imitation of the appearances. He advocated imitation which caught the essence of things.

Aristotle found imitation to be creative and purposeful. By imitating men in action poetry served as a

therapy (Catharsis), as a moral and ethical example and also served the aesthetic purpose. Longinus

emphasized upon sublimity in poetry.

The English poets and critics like John Dryden, Philip Sidney, William Wordsworth, S. T.

Coleridge, John Keats, P.B. Shelley, Mathew Arnold and T.S. Eliot are only few names among many who

have described and defined their own views on poetry and its function. Wordsworth defines poetry as

“the spontaneous over of powerful feelings: it takes its origin from emotion recollected in tranquility”

(English Critical Tradition 1: 307). P. B. Shelley’s perception was different and he described poetry as

“the expression of the imagination” (336). Mathew Arnold defined the function of poetry to be “the

criticism of life” (English Critical Tradition 2: 64). T.S. Eliot disagrees with Wordsworth’s definition of

spontaneous overflow and says that it is an “escape from emotion *and+... an escape from personality”

(English Critical Tradition 2: 175).

The Indianv aestheticians, critics and poets defined poetry in terms of its soul and body. There

are certain elements which are present in poetry like the emotion, the figures of speech, the style and

the different levels of meanings. Different aestheticians like Bharata, Bhāmaha, Dandin,

Ānandavardhana, Kuntaka, Abhinavgupta, Jagannath have chosen only one of them to be of supreme

importance and have defined that element to be the soul of poetry. Based on this, different schools of

Indian poetics were formed, they were/are Rasa (emphasis on primary emotion), Alamkāra (figures of

speech), Riti (Style), Vakrokti (deviant meaning), Dhvani (suggestion), Auchitya (propriety), Anumiti

(inference), Tātparya (intended meaning) and Chamatkāra (surprise or magic). Though they developed

at different times, they complement each other. Poetry is comprised of all this. The aestheticians took

into account all the above mentioned elements but their focus was on any one of them.

The definitions of critics and poets cited above seem to be convincing and yet none of them can

be considered as the only definition and dimension of poetry. It is difficult to define poetry because it is

still evolving. Sri Aurobindo wrote in The Future Poetry “Poetry like everything else in man evolves.”

(CWSA 26: 205) It means that a definition cannot be fixed upon poetry. Sri Aurobindo investigated into

the nature, function and aim of poetry in his critical treatise and explains them “not by definition, but by

description” (CWSA 26: 11). He does not define poetry but describes it at great length. The highest form

of poetry according to him is mantra. He said

the discovery of the word, the divine movement, the form of

thought proper to the reality” (CWSA 26: 10). Mantra is the highest form possible in the human speech.

But it does not mean that poetry does not exist otherwise. Sri Aurobindo describes different levels on

which poetry exists. He also describes various features and elements that make up poetry. In The Future

Poetry he traces the English poetry from the age of Chaucer and observes a particular trend in its

evolution.

He marks that Chaucer’s poetry faithfully portrays the details of the physical appearances of

men and their manners. “Chaucer has his eye fixed on the object, and that object is the external action

of life as it passes before him, throwing its figures on his kind and stirring it to a kindly satisfaction in the

movement and its interest, to a blithe sense of humour or a light and easy pathos” (CWSA 26: 60).

Chaucer’s preoccupation was with the external actions whereas his successors took note of the deeper

elements and workings of the mind of their characters. The Elizabethan age marks this quality.

Shakespeare and his contemporaries were much interested in portraying the mind of the characters

along with their external action. Sri Aurobindo finds “life-spirit” in the Elizabethan plays, especially

Shakespeare in abundance. He says, “Shakespeare’s poetry for instance is that of a man with a vivid and

many-sided response to life; it gives the impression of a multifarious knowledge of things but it was a

knowledge picked up from life as he went” (CWSA 27: 682) He observes that Shakespeare’s characters

operate on the vital consciousness, the consciousness which is the force behind all actions. In his play

Macbeth, Lady Macbeth’s determination to execute the plan of killing King Duncan when Macbeth

losses all courage is one of the many examples of the force working in Shakespeare’s plays –

……. I have given such,

and know

How tender ‘tis to love the babe that milks

me–

I would, while it was smiling inmy face,

Have pluck’d my nipple from his boneless

gums,

And dash’d the brains out, had I so sworn

As you have done to this. (Act1.Sc I)

Philosophical statements that are strewn all over Shakespeare’s pla “Life’s

but a walking shadow…” It is because of this life-spirit that his plays get power and create an impact on

the life-force of the reader. The poetry of this age exhibited more of life-force than the intellectual

force.

Poetry surging from the life-force was succeeded by the period which saw a rise of intellectual

element in the poetry. Milton portrayed this transition in his works. Sri Aurobindo observed –

…he *Milton+ has given a English poetic speech a language of intellectual thought which

is of itself highly poetic without depending on any of the formal aids of poetic

expression except those which are always essential and indispensible, a speech which

succeeds by its own intrinsic force and is in its very grain poetry and in its very grain

inspired intellectual thought-utterance. (CWSA 26: 93)

This intellectual turn of poetry brought in by Milton was carried forth by the poets John Dryden and

Alexander Pope. Their poetry was purely intellectual so much so that Sri Aurobindo remarks that they

thought in verse. Regarding the thought value of these poets, he writes, “it *their verse+ is occupied with

expressing thought, but its thought has most often little or none of the greater values. This Muse is all

brain of facile reasoning, but has no heart, no depth or sweetness of character, no high nobility of will,

no fine appeal or charm of the joy and sorrow of life.” (CWSA 26: 97) The poets used wit, humour and

satire as tools to express and ridicule the society and people. These poets essentially wrote for the

political purpose and created poetry with deliberate use of figures of speech and rhythm. It has achieved

the highest expression within its limitations.

This period of “dominant intellectualism” was succeeded by the Romantic period with the poets

like William Blake, William Wordsworth, S.T. Coleridge, John Keats, P.B. Shelley and Lord Byron. They

were more imaginative and indulged in expressing emotions rather than the intellect. These poets were

interested in nature and sought inspiration from the elements of nature to write poetry. Sri Aurobindo

observed, “Wordsworth saw Nature and he saw man near to Nature, and when he speaks of these

things, he finds either his noblest or his purest and most penetrating tones.” (CWSA 26: 134) Natural

and Supernatural elements were amalgamated very subtly in the poetry belonging to this (Romantic)

period. Sri Aurobindo marks that the poets have a meditative approach towards nature which is

required for the communion. He calls these poets – “the poets of the dawn” as they sought the spirit in

nature and worshiped it. This age is succeeded by the Victorian and the Modern age of English poetry

which marks the disintegration of the individual and the society and was a period of unrest and

uncertainties. Inventions and discoveries of science and the development of psychology had created

dissatisfaction and brought insecurity in the society. This was reflected in the literature of this period.

Poets like Alfred Tennyson and Robert Browning exhibit an inner strife and seeking in their

poetry. This strife and seeking is heightened in the Modern era. T.S. Eliot’s “Wasteland”, “Hollow Men”

and other poems represent the world as hopeless place to live in. W.B. Yeats’ poem “The Second

Coming” hints at the expected apocalypse and the new creation. The unrest and uncertainties of these

periods were amplified by the two world wars. The dark and dull world of the poets had very little hope

to give. However, two poets Rabindranath Tagore and Walt Whitman, sort for the spirit behind this

creation. Their poetry was sublimating and integrating. They were not disturbed by the condition of the

world and had faith in the Supreme Spirit. Yeats’ poetry, through its symbolism too shows this faith.

Summarizing the development of English poetry Sri Aurobindo wrote,

The high energy of English poetry has done great and interesting things; it has portrayed

life with charm and poetic interest in Chaucer, made thought and character and action

and passion wonderful to the life soul in us in Shakespeare, seen and spoken with

nobility and grandeur of vision and voice in Milton, intellectualised vigorous or pointed

commonplace in Pope and Dryden, played with elegance and beauty on the lesser

strings with the Victorians or cast out here and there a profounder strain of thought or

more passionate and aspiring voice, and if the most spiritual strains have been few, yet

it has dreamed in light in Shelley or drawn close in Wordsworth to the soul in Nature.

(CWSA 26: 265)

He observes that the turn towards the spirit with faith and conviction is the future of poetry. The poetry

in the past had exhibited the physical aspect, the life-force, the intellect, the emotion, and the

uncertainties at its best. The poetry in future would rise towards the expression of the spirit. Sri

Aurobindo’s own poetry is an example of this. He is convinced that poetry in future would express the

spirit more and more. While poetry in the past was inspired by the aforesaid levels of consciousness, the

poetry in future would be inspired from the higher realms of consciousness; consciousness that is above

the Mind and aids a wider expression of the spirit. He defines these planes of consciousness as the

Higher mind, the Illumined mind, Intuition and Overmind. Sri Aurobindo has analyzed many poems

written by different poets that have found some expression from these levels of consciousness. His own

poetry exhibits various levels of consciousness and he has given detailed description of all these in his

writings. However, he finds mantra to be the highest form which he exemplified in his epic poem Savitri.

He defined and deliberated upon the nature and function of mantra in many of his letters and in The

Future Poetry.

A revealed word that can create, is mantra. When poetry is written from such height that it is

able to create and become a revealed word it becomes mantra. Sri Aurobindo observes that the poets

in the past have written such revealed poetry; the Vedas and the Upanishads are the examples of such

rhythmic expression. He further elaborates that, the chief function of poetry as of all art is to be the

channel to realize the Real or the Spirit. Everything evolves towards the Spirit therefore, poetry too is

destined to evolve towards the expression of the spirit. Poetry is not only a pleasure giving pastime,

neither a mechanical activity. It has a form, a substance, a style, a technique and a consciousness. Sri

Aurobindo contends that the best poetry comes wrapped in form, substance and style, but the poet

should be prepared to receive such poetry. He has to sharpen his tools of mind and technique and

prepare his consciousness to receive poetry of that high order. “For neither the intelligence, the

imagination nor the ear are the true or at least the deepest or highest recipients of the poetic delight,

even as they are not its true or highest creators; they are only its channels and instruments: the true

creator, the true hearer is the soul.” (CWSA 26: 12). The poet has to reach a level where the poetry is

heard by the soul and not by the mind.

Preparation is indispensible for the poet. If the poet is technically unequipped he will not be

able to deliver the inspiration in the correct form. If he is only technically equipped he will not be able to

call for the inspiration, or even recognize it, if it happens to visit him. Possessing a good technique, style

and the knowledge of form are indispensable instruments of the inspiration. If the poet is sound in all

these, then he might be able to catch and deliver the inspiration honestly, without distorting the

original. With this preparation when the poetry comes to the poet, it delights him. Sri Aurobindo

describes this delight to be analogous to the delight of creation of the world. The poetry thus created is

harmonious and rhythmic and corresponds to the harmonies and rhythms of the Universe. This rhythmic

utterance is the saving grace of poetry.

Sri Aurobindo describes three essentials which make poetry a mantra,

The Mantra, poetic expression of the highest spiritual reality, is only possible when

three highest intensities of poetic speech meet and become indissolubly one, a highest

intensity of rhythmic movement, a highest intensity of interwoven verbal form and

thought-substance, of style, and a highest intensity of the soul’s vision of truth.” (CWSA

26:19)

Rhythm is an important element of poetry. It is commonly understood as metrical composition or

rhyming. However, all metrical compositions are not necessarily true poetry. The rhythm at its highest

corresponds to the rhythm in the Universe, for it has a harmonious rhythm. Similarly, poetry which

catches the universal rhythm is able to sustain for ages. It is this rhythm which is at once realized by the

soul within. Metrical compositions that appeal only to the ear or intellect are short lived.

Style is the technique to convey the idea in the best possible way. The idea to be conveyed

forms the substance of poetry. Style and substance of poetry at their perfection are important to make

the poem mantra. Like perfect rhythm, perfect style and substance are the channels of inspiration. The

substance of poetry should be such that it takes one nearer to the truth beyond. The substance of

poetry moulds the style. However, the possession of a perfect style and the choice of an eloquent

subject might not be sufficient for poetry to become mantra. When style, substance and technique are

present and are carried into the realm of spiritual vision, poetry with great intensity is produced. This

intense poetry which has come as an inspired word then becomes the ‘mantra’.

Sri Aurobindo upholds the ancient concept of the kavi as being a seer-poet. In Vedic times a kavi

was not merely a person expressing in verse. He was a seer, a sage, who was involved in spiritual

adventures and had the capacity to see beyond the given time and space. He does not only have the

capacity to see but also the capacity to make his readers see. Sri Aurobindo declares in The Future

Poetry that “Vision is the characteristic power of the poet…The Kavi was in the idea of the ancients the

seer and revealer of truth…Poetry, in fact, being Art, must attempt to make us see…it is an inner sight

which he [poet] opens in us, and this inner sight must have been intense in him before he can awaken it

in us.” (CWSA 26: 31) He further says – “the greatest of the poets have been always those who have had

a large and powerful interpretative and intuitive vision of Nature and life and man and whose poetry has

arisen out of that in a supreme revelatory utterance.” (CWSA 26: 32) It is on this criterion that Sri

Aurobindo analyzed and judged the success of poetry and poet. The visionary quality of poetry is of

supreme importance to him. Vision for him is not merely the word painting but a quality to see beyond

the physical objects and to sense that which is not present to the senses. The visions come in flashes or

can come as a continuous stream of lines which the poet captures in poetry. When the reader or

listener is open to receive it, he experiences the same intensity and vision as experienced by its creator.

Poet thus becomes the receiver and deliverer of the truth of the beyond.

In The Future Poetry Sri Aurobindo writes that it is difficult to profess anything with certainty

about the future of poetry however, the turn that he observed in Whitman and Tagore gives him a clue

that in future, poetry would come from the “intuitive mind”. This age would seek inspiration from the

intuitive plane of consciousness and would strive at uttering poetry from yet higher levels of

consciousness. The mantra would be possible only when the inspiration from the highest realm pours

down into the poet who would then become an instrument and not the creator of poetry. Sri Aurobindo

describes five essential elements that the poetry “truth, beauty, delight, life

and spirit” he calls them the “five suns of poetry”. He describes each of these elements in separate

essays in The Future Poetry.

The word “truth” is wide and offers different approaches. It is noteworthy that the concept of

truth differs from person to person. There are few objections raised regarding the relation of art and

truth. One of the objections is that art is divorced from truth. Art dwells on imagination and loves

beauty, therefore is separate from the real life experiences. Another view relates reality to truth. It is

opposite to the objection raised before. It believes that art is a faithful portrayal of reality. Art functions

as a sublimating agent of the real life experiences. It takes up the subject from the outer life and

transmutes it to a higher level. The “old academic conception of truth of a certain selective imagination

and consonant with reason” is another view. Here, truth of poetry, philosophy, science and religion are

compared and they have a different approach towards truth. However at their peaks they become

expressions of the Real. Thus, truth at a higher pedestal is the same for all.

Sri Aurobindo remarks that the “sustaining power” of poetry is the “breath of life”. The poetry

till now has expressed life in its physical, emotive, imaginative and intellectual perspectives. He says that

the life within is much larger and beautiful than the external life and poetry in future has to express this

inner life. The poetry expressing inner and wider life would spring from the higher realms of

consciousness and brighter recesses of one’s being and will have the intuitive quality. The expression of

life would then be revealed and would not thought-out. The greater breath of life will sustain the poetry

for long period.

In The Future Poetry Sri Aurobindo writes that, “Delight is the soul of existence, beauty the

intense impression, the concentrated form of delight.” (CWSA 26: 254). A poet creates out of delight

and seeks beauty. Beauty and delight thus have been the “twin powers” with which the creation of

poetry proceeded. However, with the rise of reason, the delight of creation has been replaced by the

effort to convey the idea. The thirst for beauty has become more externalized and has given way to

pervert representation of objects. The ancients perhaps had this sense of inner joy and beauty which

they sought for in all forms of art. Sri Aurobindo contends that the poetry in future will seek the inner

beauty and delight and would thus become a sublime expression of the Spirit.

The fifth sun of poetry – “spirit” is an essential element which the poetry of the future will

embody. Sri Aurobindo wrote, “A poetry born direct from and full of the power of the spirit and

therefore a largest and a deepest self-expression of the soul and mind of the race is that for which we

are seeking and of which the more profound tendencies of the creative mind seem to be in travail.”

(CWSA 26: 268). Poetry in future will rise out of its mundane status and express the spirit in its fullness.

It will express the spirit of self, of man and of nature. In the ancient times, Vedas, Upanishads and the

Gita have shown this quality. They embody the spirit in all and sing of the Infinite and Immutable. A

similar turn is expected of poetry in the future also but, with a higher purpose.

When poetry becomes capable of expressing the spirit, the form of its expression will have to undergo a

change. Sri Aurobindo observes that the present forms of expression will prove to be insufficient to

express the new kind of poetry which will come from the higher realms of consciousness. He gives the

example of the epic form and says that the epics in the past dealt with the subjects of kings and queens

and wars and glories and focused more on the external action.

The change to a profounder motive will substitute a soul significance as the real

substance, the action will not be there for its external surface interest but as a vital

indication of the significance, the surrounding circumstance will be only such as helps to

point and frame it and bring out its accessory suggestions and mood and feeling and

character its internal powers and phases. (CWSA 26: 285)

Similarly, he envisions that the lyrical poetry is more likely to suit the demands of the rhythm of

the spirit and life. He exemplifies the change of form in his epic Savitri and in sonnets. Savitri has very

little external action and all actions take place to fulfill the needs of the spirit. The battle between Death

and Savitri too is not a physical battle, rather a subtle battle of the dark force with that of the Divine

force. Other forms of poetry would also change and new forms may be created to suit the new

expression and experience.

The evolution of poetry that Sri Aurobindo envisages proceeds towards the “Word”. The

ancients believed in the inherent power of words. They knew that the words have power and that they

operate on four different levels viz- vaikhari, madhayama, pashyanti and paravi. Vaikhari and

madhyama belong to common everyday speech. The first is the common utterance and the second is

the thought. Pashyanti is called the seeing speech; its essential qualities are śruti (hearing) and driśti

(seeing). This Vāk/speech is possessed by sages and kavis. This hearing and seeing does not depend

upon the external senses. It is an inner hearing and inner seeing. This inner sensibility is developed with

labour and effort of raising the consciousness to those heights where intuitive knowledge and

knowledge by identity are realized. At such level, the utterances become powerful channels of the

Truth; it is here that the mantra is possible. The future of poetry that Sri Aurobindo envisages has to

reach to that power of the word, that seeing word, where mantra can be produced; only then poetry

would fulfill its true purpose. It is to this creative power of Word that the poetry has to ascend.

Sri Aurobindo’s aesthetics, his commentary and appreciation of art and poetry reflect that he

was well versed with the Indian and the Western aesthetics. He studied them and formulated his own

theory of aesthetics and aesthesis which he practiced and exemplified in his analysis and creative

activity. It will be worthwhile to take a bird’s eye view of the Indian and the western aesthetics on the

basis of which the aesthetic theory of Sri Aurobindo may be culled out in the forthcoming chapters.

There will be an alternative description of the two and the definitions would be put simultaneously

wherever required.

The etymological meaning of the Sanskrit word for literature is Sahitya, which has balance,

coordination, concord and contact as its attribute. Poetics or aesthetics is known as

Kavyalamkārshāstra. The art of appreciating poetry started with Bharata’s Nātyashastra. According to

the belief of the scholars in India all the traditions and theories are there at least in the seed form in the

Vedas and the Upanishads. Indeed, Rig Veda, Atharva Veda, Chandogya and Brhadaranyaka and some

other Upanishads have some ideas in the seed-form which the aestheticians developed later. Theories

may be said to have come into existence with Bharata’s Nātyashastra. His treatise is so systematic and

well designed that the scholars believe that there might have been earlier aestheticians who wrote

before Bharata which helped him systematize his work. This tradition was carried forward by various

aestheticians, who commented upon the already existing works and created their own theory or

approach to literature. Lollada, Shankuka, Rama Varma are some of the commentators on Nātyashastra

whose names have come down to us, however, their works could not be found. The next text that is

available after Nātyashastra was Dandin’s Kavyadarsha written around 600-750 AD. After him there is a

continuous outflow of aesthetic theories till the 17th century. Bhāmaha, Udbhatta, Rudratta,

Anandavardhana, Abhinavgupta, Kuntaka, Hemachandra, Rajeshekhara, Mahima Bhatta, Bhoja and

Jagannath form the chain of aestheticians who wrote extensively on the appreciation of poetry. Most of

the aestheticians were themselves poets and their theories seem to have born out of their experience

and intense study.

The Western aesthetic tradition starts as early as from Plato. Plato defines the importance and

the work of a poet. In his view the poet should help in building the character of the citizens through his

poetry. He differentiates between good and bad poetry on the basis of the effective imitation. After

Plato it was Aristotle who shaped the poetics and wrote about the difference between tragedy, comedy,

epic and history based on the texts that were available to him during his times. Aristotle’s poetics is

believed to be the first text on poetics in the Western aesthetics. After him, aestheticians from various

other nations like Longinus (Greece), Horace (Italy), and the English critics, Sir Philip Sidney, Dr. Samuel

Johnson, Jonh Dryden, William Wordsworth, S.T. Coleridge, John Keats, T.S. Eliot and many such poets

and critics added to the tradition of aesthetics and literary criticism. The main task of the aestheticians

was to define poetry and describe the process of poetic creation. The appreciation of poetry was

primarily based on the understanding of the reader of the poets’ intentions. The focus of analysis was to

find the aim, the primary impulse and the emotion which moved the poet to create poetry. As the

aesthetics and critical appreciation developed, the focus shifted from the intended meaning of the poet

to the formal aspects of the text and the interpretation given by the reader on the basis of his/her

scholarship and perception. Text was considered to be an autonomous body and the interaction of text

and the reader assumed primacy. Still further developments saw the influence of economy, gender,

culture and political ideologies in the art of appreciating literature. Many schools of thought like, reader

response, marxist criticism, feminist criticism, deconstruction, Queer theory, psychoanalysis, post-

colonial perspectives and others developed rapidly almost simultaneously. Now with the growth of

technology, information exchange has become easy and many factors affect and influence the

interpretation of the text. Single text may be subjected to analysis under all these theories and they are

likely to yield various interpretations. However, it is not in the scope of this chapter to go into the details

of these methods and techniques. Few important concepts and differences may be highlighted

wherever required which might help in the understanding of Sri Aurobindo’s aesthetics.

In Western aesthetics no such particular school may be defined. The English poets who wrote in

this area are studied under the era they belonged to, for example Dryden to the Neo-Classical age and

Wordsworth to the Romantic age. They are known as critics and poets of the age they lived in and not

necessarily by any particular concept they highlighted. Even though they emphasized a particular

thought, there is no particular name that may be given to these schools. With the modern era coming in,

things shaped in a different fashion and like the nomenclature given in Indian aesthetic tradition, the

Western schools too came to be known for the concepts they emphasized like Formalism and

Deconstruction.

Aestheticians and poets have given definitions of poetry in various dimensions. They have

defined poetry in their own way which fell into the domain of their own experience. Indian as well as the

western aestheticians wrote extensively about the nature of poetry. While the Indians described poetry

with the parameters of its deepest and highest element – Soul, the Western definitions are mainly based

on the way poetry is created and the function it performs. These two approaches are not exclusive, but

only differ in the starting point. They finally moved into explaining the definition, function, element, and

the purpose of poetry.

Literature around the world was expressed in poetry; prose is a recent adaptation. Thus we have

the Veda, Upanishads, Gita, the Epics – Ramayana and Mahabharata, Homer’s Illiad and Odyssey

Dante’s Divine Comedy, Shakespeare’s plays, Milton’s Paradise Lost all in verse that came under the

umbrella term poetry. It may be noted that prose as we have it today is not rhythmic. However, in the

Vedic Brahmanas, even the prose was rhythmic and hence fell under the category of poetry. It is also

true, that the ancient risi and ācharya in India and the eminent aestheticians in Greece, especially

Aristotle assigned the highest status to poetry over all the other forms of art and literature. Aristotle

compared poetry with other forms and concluded that poetry combines rhythm, movement,

imagination, vision and sight, words and expressions, emotion and technique in it and hence it stands on

the peak. Indian aestheticians’ criterion was that of the connection of spirit with the poetic word. The

rhythmic word which itself is treated equivalent to Brahman is all powerful to stir the consciousness of

the poet and the reader and thus elevate them. Therefore, they considered poetry as the highest form

of art. While they aspired for the union between the individual and God through the rhythmic medium,

they wrote extensively about the definition and scope of ‘Poetry’. The Western aestheticians wanted to

achieve the highest perfection in this form of expression; hence they too described ‘Poetry’ at large. It is

the poetic quality which was appreciated in any work and not the work written in the verse form

necessarily. The poetic quality may be present in the prose too; therefore, poetics is comprised of

defining, appreciating and analyzing poetry. In recent times aesthetics mainly focuses on the ‘text’ and

does not necessarily define the genre under a general reference. Poetry now remains only a genre and

does not account for all texts. Nevertheless, the definitions given by eminent aestheticians may be

studied in order to see the basis on which Sri Aurobindo proceeded in forming his aesthesis.

The first and the most ancient school of aesthetics in India emphasized the importance on

primary emotion in poetry. Taittiriya Upanishad says “raso vai sah”, “this that is well and beautifully

made, verily it is no other than the delight behind existence.” (CWSA 18: 221). Bharata focused on the

depiction and perception of emotion as the central aim of poetry. He wrote primarily about the play and

therefore was equally concerned with the interpretation and representation of the text in its true

emotion. He classified eight basic emotions and formulated eight major rasas corresponding to each

basic emotion. There are later additions to this and today the number of rasas ranges from eight to

twelve or even more. He also classified many secondary emotions which are the accompaniments or

resultant emotions of the primary emotions. Emotions thus became the soul of poetry for Bharata and

for those who followed him. Perhaps it was based on the major emotion that Aristotle defined tragedy

and comedy. The end result of one is that of horror and disgust and the other laughter and mirth. There

are many nuances of each type that Aristotle clearly explains in his work (Poetics), however, seen from

the emotive point of view Aristotle’s analysis too may be grouped along with Bharata’s rasa with some

variations. The fulfillment of the rasa or the emotion is seen in the perception of the reader or the

audience who sees the theatrical performance. The success in its deliverance lies in the fact that the

reader, or the viewer or sahrydaya (one-heart) as the perceiver is called in Sanskrit should be able to

identify the exact rasa (emotion) as in the original text. The effort to deliver an emotion was also seen in

the poems of the English poet Wordsworth. He defines poetry according to the mode and impulse under

which poetry is created and says, “poetry is the spontaneous overflow of powerful feelings: it takes its

origin from the emotions recollected in tranquility” (English Critical Traditions 2: 307). Here the poet

talks about the recollection of emotion as the reason of its creation. The emotive aspect is important for

Wordsworth. Another critic D. H. Lawrence holds a similar view. He wrote – “Literary criticism can be no

more than a reasoned account of the feeling produced upon the critic by the book he is criticizing… The

touchstone is emotion, not reason” (English Critical Traditions 2: 228). Emotions and feelings thus

assume the central aspect of study for this school.

The figures of speech, the rhyme, rhythm and technique all enhance poetry. They are the

embellishments of any text. These embellishments are called “alamkāra” in Sanskrit. The aesthetician

Bhāmaha, was the one who emphasized that alamkāra is the soul of poetry. He stressed that the word

and its meaning are equally important. “Shabdarthau sahitau kavyam” (S. Murali, Mantra of Vision:

106). He laid down a theory explaining the qualities of these alamkāra classifying the ornamentation of

words (shabdalāmkara) to that of meaning (arthālamkara). The figures of speech such as similes,

metaphors, alliterations, assonances, rhymes and other methods enhance poetry and reach out to the

reader through their beauty and suggestive nature. It is suggested by the Indian aestheticians that these

tools may be employed for the enhancement and promotion of the meaning it should not be decorative

for its own sake. This school of aesthetics which gave importance to the creation and understanding of

poetry through the figures of speech was similar to New Criticism which cropped up in the United States

of America in the beginning of the 20th century. Critics I.A Richards, F.R. Leavis, J.C. Ransom, William

Empson and others were known as the New critics who developed the mode of studying and

interpreting poetry in a way which eschews the intention of the author and even his biography. The

poem or text is taken to be an autonomous body and is analyzed based on the figures of speech and

other stylistic devices through which the meaning is conveyed. It advocates a close reading of the text

and aims at an objective approach. The mode of study of this school is the analysis of the formal

elements to deduce the meaning of the text instead of the intention of the author. However, the Indian

aestheticians did not necessarily aim at ignoring the author and allowed some amount of subjectivity.

Keeping the meaning central to the text the analysis of the alāmkara were to be made, whereas the

New critics completely omitted the background of the author and his intentions in writing the poem.

This was the school which stood complementary to the rasa, though it developed much later. Bharata

did account for the embellishments in the texts but his focused remained with the deliverance of the

rasa. It was Bhāmaha who developed all its aspects and enhanced the analysis of poetry.

Style or rīti of poetry also played an important role in determining the meaning of poetry.

Aestheticians Dandin and Vāmana believed that the style of the poem shaped its meaning and even its

rasa. Vāmana classified three major styles namely vaidarbhi, gaudiya and pānchāli. Style of the poem

was based on the quality of words used. He identified ten qualities of words and sense – ooj, prasād,

slesh, samatā, samādhi, mādhurya, saukumārya, udārata, arthvyakti and kānti. The nature and quality

of words here mean the weight, the stress and the meaning they convey. The poem presenting the veer

rasa i.e. representing the chivalrous aspects should have words that are sonorous and are dense, while

the one expressing the sringara rasa of that of romantic or erotic love should be soft and smooth. Such

was the distinction made by the Indian aesthetician. The choice and placement of words in the poem

determined its style. Vaidarbhi is a soft style, presenting subdued emotions. Gaudiya presents the crude

and the rude emotions identified as having “largeness and profusion” (Essays in Sanskrit Criticism: 215);

and pānchāli is a mixture of these two styles. Dr. Krishnamoorthy explains that the former style is more

precise and aims at clarity of thoughts and images, whereas the second style is more ornamented and

has vivid imagery and it is less sharp than the former. Vāmana developed the dimensions of style in his

writings and believed – “ritiratma kavyasya”, “style is the soul of poetry” (Sreekantaiyya 122).

The New Criticism and the Formalist school of criticism too had similar approaches to the text.

V.S. Seturaman identifies some critic as stylisticians in his anthology – Contemporary Criticism. He has

selected four essays for this section, the authors of whom may be the stylisticians he refers to, they are

– Roman Jakobson & Lawrence Jones, Michael Riffaterre, H.G. Widdowson, and E.D. Hirsch Jr. The essay

by Widdowson named “Stylistics” gives insight into what this kind of analysis deals with. He clarifies the

aims of stylistics and the mode of its analysis. “The purpose of stylistic analysis is to investigate how the

resources of a language code are put to use in the production of actual messages. It is concerned with

patterns of use in given texts” (Contemporary Criticism: 156). The emphasis on style is so much that the

stylisticians believed that the content is not all that important. Treatment of the subject matter decides

the impact of the work and not necessarily the content. They opine that even if the content is dense and

it is not treated properly or is not expressed in a style, it will fail to create an impression upon the

reader. Therefore, style and technique assumed a focal position for this school of aesthetics.

The above mentioned schools of aesthetics specifically aimed at finding the meaning through

rasa, alamkāra or riti. The relation of word and meaning gained more importance when aestheticians

brought out the fact that it is not the literal meaning of the word that is important. The problem or the

issue addressed here is ‘where does the meaning lie’? What can be the meaning of the text? This

question brought forth many theories. Vakrokti (deviant meaning), dhvani (suggested meaning),

auchitya (appropriateness in rasa), anumiti (inferential meaning) and chamatkara (charming or stiking

element giving meaning) and the relation of word and meaning as explained by Bhartrhari in his sphota

theory all address the question of meaning and its relation to the word. Word here is the “linguistic

expression as a whole” (Tandra Patnaik, Śabda: 63). Sphota means bursting forth with the interaction of

the text with the reader; meaning is grasped through the interaction of vibrations. Bhartrhari describes

four kinds of speech (vāk) that have different intensity and force and act differently on human beings.

The four kinds of speech pertain to four different levels of consciousness and require certain amount of

preparation for its reception when the word becomes more and more laden with power and force.

Precisely, there are connotations to a given text and therefore it becomes open ended and offers

multiple meanings.

Bhartrhari was a grammarian. Other concepts were put forth by different aestheticians who

involve in deep study and analysis of the existing texts and critical treatises. Ānandavardhan and

Abhinavgupta, the Kashmiri aestheticians emphasized the concept of dhvani and said that it is the soul

of poerty – “kāvyasyatma dhvanih” (Sreekantaiyya 126). Eminent critic and scholar, S. Murali explains

the point further in his book Mantra of Vision – “suggestion in the word which is different from the

denotative power, abhidā and from the power of connotation lakhanā and from the intention tātparya.

The process of vyanjana of the word is dhvani which culminates in the aesthetic relish, rasa” (106).

Kuntaka, Sanskrit aesthetician advocated that it is the deviant meaning that is important in any

text. It can be an exaggerated meaning too. In his treatise Vakroktijivita, he lays down the ideal of

meaning along with the definition of good poetry. Dr. K.Krishnamoorthy’s translation and explanation of

Kuntaka’s view shows this explicitly – “Poetry is that word and sense together enshrined in a style

revealing the artistic (lit, ‘out-of-way’) creativity of the poet on the one hand and giving aesthetic delight

to the man of taste on the other” (292). This is the deviant meaning which the soul of poetry for

Kuntaka. It is in the formulation and perception of this deviant meaning that the creativity of the poet,

the beauty of the text and the expertise of the reader is measured. Anumīti, Chamatkār, Auchitya were

other approaches to the meaning brought forth by the aestheticians, Mahima Bhatta, Jagannath and

Visveshwara and Kshemndra in due course of time. The debates over the nature of meaning that a text

should bring out, gives the variety of meanings that are possible. The inferential meaning that Mahima

Bhatta emphasized upon was based on the imagination of the type of rasa being expressed in poetry.

Although this view seem to be a narrow one and was later assimilated as only an attribute of dhvani or

as one of the suggested meaning of the text. There are some striking elements in poetry that makes it

meaningful, yet it is inexplicable, only the reader who identifies with the text, the sahrydaya can feel the

charming or the striking element. This was highlighted by Jagannath and Visveshawara. The former

emphasized the ramanīya (charming) aspect which lead to catmatkāra (striking quality) in any poem.

The appropriateness of the word and the meaning in a rasa chosen for expression counts for the

appropriateness of the meaning for Kshemendra and he explains this at length in his treatise –

Auchityavicāracarcā. Dr. K. Krishnamoorthy sums up all the aspects of Indian aesthetics, puts them as

complementary units and not as opposing each other. He wrote –

If we consider figuratively poetry to be a person, word and meaning would constitute

his body and Rasa his life; excellences of style would be like the qualities of valour and

wisdom. Defects in style would be similar to the ailments like lameness and blindness.

Ritis would be comparable to the harmonious disposition of the limbs and poetic figures

to the ornaments to be worn on the body (Essays in Criticism: 218).

The recent developments in the English literary criticism point towards the multiplicity of

meaning as pointed out by the Indian aestheticians centuries ago. The relation of the word and

meaning, of the meaning of the same word being different in poetry and general communication has

arrested the attention of the Western critics and philosophers too. Some of the structuralist critics like

Ferdinand de Saussure, Jonathan Culler, Gerard Genette, and Tzvetan Todorov and poststructuralist

critics Jacques Derrida, Jacques Lacan, Paul de Man, Harold Bloom, Hillis Miller and others focused their

criticism on the text. They indulged in deciphering the meaning out of the structure, either by building

one or deconstructing the other.

The basic tenet of the ‘structuralist’ school is that, there is an already existing structure against

which the text is placed and analysed. This structural approach stems from the linguistic concepts of the

French linguist Ferdinand de Saussure (1857-1913, Course in General Linguistics). Saussure identified

language as made up of two parts – langue and parole. Langue is the grammatical structure and parole

is the utterance. Utterance is studied against the background of the grammatical structure of a

language. Similarly, structuralist critics place the text against the existing background of the social,

economic, archetypal, and psychological structures. An Indian text when placed against a larger system

of Indian social settings, beliefs, traditions and psychology is likely to give a different interpretation than

when it is placed in a non-Indian setting. The study of different structures behind the text gave birth to

multiple meanings. The meaning corresponded to the system from which it was extracted. However, it

was difficult to delimit the boundaries of any structure, for a structure in itself is highly complex and

undergoes changes. Therefore, there is no stable basis of a structure around the text.

The poststrcturalist on the other hand, tried to unravel the text itself. They ‘deconstructed’ the

text. Saussure’s theory of finding meaning through differences was advanced and extended by Derrida

when he combines the ‘difference’ and ‘deference’ to form a new word ‘différance’. Derrida believes

that the meaning always eludes the reader. The dictionary serves as a good example to this. A word is

expressed and defined by several words, yet the meaning does not come into grasp, which are further

alluded by words and thus the meaning alludes. He also marks that no one meaning can be assigned to

one object as the name and the significance of the same object changes with the context.

The difference and the deference in language gave rise to multiple interpretations of the text.

Not only the theories put forth by Derrida and Saussure but those which were developing alongside

them and had difference aspects to analyze. The Marxist criticism focused attention of the economic

and social status and structures of the society and its influence in the making of the text and in its

interpretation. The Reader Response theory pioneered by Stanley Fish and Roland Barthes gave prime

importance to the view of the reader. They believed that it is the reader who gives meaning to the text.

The psychoanalyst theories applied the theories of Freud and other psychologists to literature and

deciphered yet varied theories.

Further, the postcolonial reading of the text traced the relation between the colonized and the

colonizer. This theory found a wider application even to the text which did not fall under the post-

colonial period. The postcolonial analysis of Shakespeare’s play presents the age long psychology of

human beings to dominate, subordinate and suppress others. Interpretations of the same text increased

with every theory being applied to it. This idea of multiple meaning coincides with the Indian critics and

aesthetician’s view of the text offering multiple meanings. However, the theories applied are different

and the stands taken by different critics, Indian and Western too are different. A conclusion that may be

safely drawn from this brief survey of critical traditions of ancient India and the West is that all the

critics and aestheticians spoke about concepts like – definition of poetry, role of poet and poetry,

relation of the poet, reader and the text, the importance of practice and significance of genius, the

importance of technique, style and diction, the process of poetic creation, about imagination and

intuition, the importance of text or the word and the parameters that each author chooses to assess any

work of literature. Almost all the Western and the Indian aestheticians and critics have addressed these

concepts in their writings, highlighting those which they found important. Sri Aurobindo also wrote

abundantly about each of these. His views are found in his commentaries on the Veda, Upanishad, Gita,

Mahabharata, Ramayana and few other texts on which he wrote at length, his critical treatise – The

Future Poetry, his enumerable letters on poetry and art and even in his philosophical writings.

As is evidenced from the definitions of poetry, and the usage of the levels of speech in poetry

and mantra being the highest order of poetry, Sri Aurobindo was aware of both traditions in literary

criticism and alāmkarshastra of the West and India. His commentaries and writings reveal that he

mastered these theories and helped evolve a new understanding of literature, thus paving way not only

for the future of literature but also of that of criticism. V.S. Seturaman edited an anthology –

Contemporary Criticism in which he selected the critics belonging to the twentieth century and arranged

their essays according to the movement which is chronological i.e. from Formalism to Post Structuralism

with the ending section “Back to the Word”. However, essays were not written in the chronological

order necessarily; the authors belong to different time and decades; they belong to the periods when

specific developments were taking place. Therefore, the critics also came to be known for the period

and tendency of the movement they belonged to. For example, Cleanth Brooks is known to be a New

Critic whereas Roland Barthes belongs to the Reader Response theory. Seturaman has selected an essay

of Cleanth Brooks and grouped the essay under the section emphasizing the “word”. Roland Barthes has

been put with the structuralist critics. Seturaman’s choice of essays made him group them under

different titles. The essays taken have been published in different issues and Seturaman has quoted the

Bibliographical details of the same, but Sri Aurobindo’s original essays appeared in early decades of the

century. Sri Aurobindo’s views were not restricted to his time. His essay that has been placed at the end

of the anthology reveals that Sri Aurobindo has a message for the future. It has been selected from the

volume that forms his critical treatise called The Future Poetry. In his treatise he not only traces the

future of literature and criticism, he surveys the past trends of literature and criticism in his own

measure, applying his own parameter of consciousnessvii.

A brief survey of The Future Poetry gives an idea of the various aspects and concepts of some of

the terms related to poetry and poetics in Sri Aurobindo’s views. It may be inferred that the aim of this

treatise is not to foresee the future of poetry and poetics alone, but it gives a comprehensive line of

development of poetry and poetic. It is Sri Aurobindo’s subjective analysis, but the reader may verify Sri

Aurobindo’s observations against the works of the poets he analyzed.

There are of course several ways of understanding poetry and poetics. Especially in the case of a

mystic poetic like Sri Aurobindo who has produced a large volume of poetry and also has written

extensively on poetry, especially his own poetic theory. There are several dimensions to them. However,

I have been able to identity these three key ideas – vision, experience and experiment as cardinal to Sri

Aurobindo’s poetics.

The present dissertation focuses on “vision”, “experience”, “experiment”, “aesthetics” and

“aesthesis” and studies the formation of Sri Aurobindo’s poetics through them. “Vision” forms the

essential link between all the concepts as it keeps Sri Aurobindo’s idea of vision being the “characteristic

power of the poet” at the center of analysis. The experiences and experiments discussed in one of the

chapters ensue from the greater vision and experiences of Sri Aurobindo. As already mentioned, his

experiments form an integral part of his spiritual as well as his poetic endeavors. Sri Aurobindo

envisioned heightened levels of consciousness and strove to reach there with his efforts and

experiments. Similarly, he had the vision of the highest order of poetry and also of all that which saved

poetry from gaining that highest order. Therefore, he was able to write about the merits and

shortcomings of different poets and their poetry. Likewise, it was his vision informed by his spiritual

experiences which lead him to distinguish between aesthetics as the perception of beauty with the

mind, and aesthesis to the inner perception relating mostly to the truth. However, the three major

chapters stand independent and may be seen as isolated endeavours to organize a few concepts