ସମ୍ବଲପୁରରେ ୱାଲଡେନ୍ - ୩

 ଜୟନ୍ତ ମହାପାତ୍ରଙ୍କ ସହ ଶୈଲେନ ରାଉତରାୟଙ୍କର ଏକ ବାର୍ତ୍ତାଳାପ

୧୯୧୧ରେ ଉତ୍ତୋଳିତ ସେ ସମୟର କଟକର କମିଶନରେଟ୍ ହାଉସ୍‌ର ଫଟୋ
ଫଟୋ କ୍ରେଡ଼ିଟ୍ - ୱିକିମିଡିଆ କମନ୍ସ୍

ପ୍ରଶ୍ନ  – ଆପଣଙ୍କ ପ୍ରଥମ ଇଂରାଜୀ ବହି ଦୁଇଟି, ‘କ୍ଲୋଜ୍ ଦି ସ୍କାଏ ଟେନ୍ ବାଏ ଟେନ୍’ ତଥା ‘ସ୍ୱୟମ୍ବର୍ ଆଣ୍ଡ ଅଦର୍ ପୋଏମ୍ସ୍’ ୧୯୭୧ରେ ଛପା ହେଇଥିଲା । ଆପଣ ପ୍ରଥମେ ଇଂରାଜୀରେ କବିତା ଲେଖିବା ଆରମ୍ଭ କଲେ ତାହାର ପାଞ୍ଚ ବର୍ଷ ପୂର୍ବେ । ଆପଣଙ୍କର ପ୍ରଥମ ଓଡ଼ିଆ କବିତା ବହି ‘ବଳି’ ଛପା ହେଲା ୧୯୯୩ ମସିହାରେ, ଅର୍ଥାତ୍ ତାହାର ୨୨ ବର୍ଷ ପରେ । ଆପଣ ପ୍ରଥମେ କେବେ ଓଡ଼ିଆ କବିତା ଲେଖିବାକୁ ଓ ଛପାଇବାକୁ ଆରମ୍ଭ କଲେ ? ପ୍ରଥମେ କେଉଁଠି ଲେଖିଲେ । ଯେତେବେଳେ ଓଡ଼ିଆରେ ଲେଖିଲେ, କେଉଁକେଉଁ ପତ୍ରିକାକୁ ଲେଖା ପଠାଉଥିଲେ ?

ଜୟନ୍ତ ମହାପାତ୍ର – ସେତେବେଳେ ହିଁ ମୁଁ ଆରମ୍ଭ କଲି, ୧୯୯୩ ବେଳକୁ । ଆଗରୁ ଓଡ଼ିଆରେ କେବେ ଲେଖି ନ ଥିଲି । ଭାବି ନଥିଲି କେବେ ଓଡ଼ିଆରେ ଲେଖିବି ବୋଲି, ଯେତେବେଳେ ଇଂରାଜୀରେ ଲେଖୁଥିଲି । କାରଣ ସବୁ କବିମାନେ ଓଡ଼ିଆରେ ଲେଖି କରି ଇଂରାଜୀକୁ ଯାଆନ୍ତି ।  ମୁଁ ଜାଣିନି କାହିଁକି । ଓଡି଼ଆରେ କବିତା ଲେଖିବାକୁ ଆରମ୍ଭ କଲା ପରେ ଏଇ ସ୍ଥାନୀୟ ପତ୍ରିକାମାନଙ୍କୁ ପଠାଇବାକୁ ଆରମ୍ଭ କଲି, 'ଝଙ୍କାର' ଆଦି । ସେତେବେଳେ ତ ବହୁତ ପତ୍ରିକା ଥିଲା । 

ପ୍ରଶ୍ନ  – ବିଦ୍ୟାପୁରୀର ପିତାମ୍ବର ମିଶ୍ର ଆପଣଙ୍କର ପ୍ରାୟତଃ ଓଡ଼ିଆ ବହି ଛପେଇଚନ୍ତି । କିନ୍ତୁ ଆପଣଙ୍କର ଇଂରାଜୀ ବହିଗୁଡ଼ିକ ଭିନ୍ନ ଭିନ୍ନ ଜାଗାରେ ଛପା ହେଇଚି । ପିତାମ୍ବର ମିଶ୍ରଙ୍କ ସହ ଆପଣଙ୍କ ସମ୍ପର୍କ ବିଷୟରେ ଆପଣ ଆମକୁ ଟିକେ କହିବେ ? ପ୍ରଥମେ କେମିତି ଭେଟ ହେଲେ ? କେମିତି ଜାଣିଲେ ?

ଜୟନ୍ତ ମହାପାତ୍ର – ପ୍ରଥମେ ମୁଁ ତ ଲେଖୁଥିଲି । ଛପା ହେଲାଠୁ ଭାବିଲି ବହି ଗୋଟେ କରିବି । ସୁଲୋଚନା ବୋଲି ମୋର ଜଣେ ଭଲ ସାଙ୍ଗ ଥିଲେ । ଆମେ ଏକାଠି ପଢ଼େଇଥିଲୁ । ସୁଲୋଚନାଙ୍କର ତାଙ୍କ ସହ ଚିହ୍ନାପରିଚୟ ଥିଲା । ମୁଁ ମୋର ପାଣ୍ଡୁଲିପି ଧରି ତାଙ୍କ ସହ ପିତାମ୍ବର ମିଶ୍ରଙ୍କ ପାଖକୁ ଗଲି । ସେ କହିଲେ ଛାପିବେ ବୋଲି । ବାସ୍ ସେତିକି ।  ମୁଁ ତାଙ୍କୁ ତାହା ଆଗରୁ ଜାଣି ନ ଥିଲି ।  

ପ୍ରଶ୍ନ  – ଆପଣଙ୍କ ଆତ୍ମଜୀବନୀ ‘ଭୋର୍ ମୋତିର କାନଫୁଲ’ରେ ଆପଣ ଅଗଷ୍ଟ କ୍ରାନ୍ତି ସମୟର ଶୋଭାଯାତ୍ରା, ସେହି ସମୟରେ ପୋଲିସ ଅତ୍ୟାଚାର ଆଉ ତାହାର ତିନି ବର୍ଷ ପରେ ହୀରୋସିମାରେ ପରମାଣୁ ବୋମା ମାଡ଼ ହେବା ବିଷୟରେ ବର୍ଣ୍ଣନା କରିଚନ୍ତି । ସେଇଟା ବୋଧେ ବାହ୍ୟଜଗତ ବିଷୟରେ ଆପଣଙ୍କର ପ୍ରଥମ ବର୍ଣ୍ଣନା । ଏବେ ଯଦି ଆପଣ ଭାବିବେ, ସେଇଟା ଆପଣଙ୍କର ବାହ୍ୟ ଜଗତ ବିଷୟରେ ସଚେତନ ହେବାର ପ୍ରଥମ ଘଟଣା ନା ସେ ବିଷୟରେ ଆପଣଙ୍କର ଆଉ କିଛି ସ୍ମୃତି ଅଛି ? ୧୯୪୨ ମସିହା ବେଳକୁ ଆପଣଙ୍କୁ ତେର ବର୍ଷ ହୋଇଥିବ ?

୨୦୧୨ରେ ଉତ୍ତୋଳିତ କଟକର ଗୋଟିଏ ଗୁପଚୁପ ଦୋକାନ (ୱିକିମିଡିଆ କମନ୍ସ୍)

ଜୟନ୍ତ ମହାପାତ୍ର – ଆମ ଘରକୁ ବାପା ‘ଷ୍ଟେଟ୍‌ସ୍‌ମ୍ୟାନ୍’ ଖବରକାଗଜ ଆଣୁଥିଲେ । ବାପା ଇଂରାଜୀରେ ବିଏ ପାସ୍ କରି ଗୋଟେ ସବ୍‌ଇନ୍‌ସ୍ପ୍‌ପେକ୍ଟର୍ ଅଫ୍ ସ୍କୁଲ୍‌ସ୍ ଥିଲେ । ମତେ ପଢ଼ଉଥିଲେ ଷ୍ଟିୱାର୍ଟ ୟୁରୋପିଆନ୍ ସ୍କୁଲରେ । ଆଉ ସେଇ ଯୋଗୁ ସିଏ ଷ୍ଟେଟ୍‌ସ୍‌ମ୍ୟାନ୍ ଆଣନ୍ତି । ଆଉ ମୁଁ ଷ୍ଟେଟ୍‌ସ୍‌ମ୍ୟାନ୍ ଦେଖେ । ଆଉ ସେଉଠୁ ମୁଁ ଦେଶଦୁନିଆ ବିଷୟରେ ଟିକେ ଜାଣିଲି । କଅଣ କଅଣ ହଉଚି, କଅଣ ନାଇଁ, ମୁଁ ସେ ବିଷୟରେ ଜାଣିବାକୁ ଆଗ୍ରହୀ ଥିଲି । ଦ୍ୱିତୀୟ ବିଶ୍ୱଯୁଦ୍ଧ ବିଷୟରେ ଜାଣିବାର ଇଚ୍ଛା ଥିଲା । ମୋର ହିଟଲର୍ ପ୍ରତି କେମିତି ଗୋଟେ ଆକର୍ଷଣ ଥିଲା । ଭାରତରେ ବ୍ରିଟିଶ ଶାସନ ଚାଲିଥିଲା । ଆମେ ଚାହୁଁଥିଲୁ ସେମାନେ ଭାରତ ଛାଡ଼ି ଚାଲି ଯାଆନ୍ତୁ । ଏଣୁ ବ୍ରିଟିଶ ସାମ୍ରାଜ୍ୟର ଯିଏ ଶତୃ, ସେ ଥିଲା ମୋର ବନ୍ଧୁ । ମୁଁ ସେତେବେଳେ ସେୟା ଭାବୁଥିଲି ।

ପ୍ରଶ୍ନ  – ଏବେ ସାର୍ବଜନୀନ ଜୀବନରୁ ସମ୍ପୂର୍ଣ୍ଣ ଭାବରେ ବ୍ୟକ୍ତିଗତ ଜୀବନ ଆଡ଼କୁ ଆସିବା । ଆପଣ ଅନ୍ଧାରକୁ ବହୁତ ଭଲ ପାଆନ୍ତି । ଅଶି ନବେ ବର୍ଷ ପୂର୍ବର କଟକର ସଞ୍ଜର ଅନେକ ତରଳ ବର୍ଣ୍ଣନା ଆପଣଙ୍କ ଆତ୍ମଜୀବନୀରେ ଅଛି । ଅଛି ଚିତ୍ର ମଧ୍ୟ ସମ୍ବଲପୁରର ରାତିର । ହେଲେ ଆପଣଙ୍କର ଅନ୍ଧାର ପ୍ରତି ଡର ଥିବାର ବି ଅନେକ ଜାଗାରେ ଉଲ୍ଲେଖ କରଛନ୍ତି । ଏବେ ଅନ୍ଧାର ସହିତ ଆପଣଙ୍କର ସମ୍ପର୍କ କଅଣ ।

ଜୟନ୍ତ ମହାପାତ୍ର – ଭଲ ପାଏ ବୋଲି କେମିତି କହିବ ? ଅନ୍ଧାର ହଉଚି ଆମ ଦୁନିଆର ଏକ ଅଂଶ, ଆମ ଜୀବନର ଏକ ଭାଗ । ମୁଁ ତାକୁ ସେମିତି ଦେଖେ । ଏବେ ବି ଅନ୍ଧାର ପ୍ରତି ପିଲା ଦିନେ ଯ।ହା ସମ୍ପର୍କ ଥିଲା, ସେମିତି ଟିକେ ଟିକେ ଅଛି । ପିଲାବେଳେ ଆମେ ଯେଉଁ ଘରେ ଥିଲୁ, ସେ ଘରଟା ସାହିର ଗୋଟାଏ ଶେଷରେ । ଆଉ ତା’ ଚାରି ପାଖେ ବଡ଼ବଡ଼ ଦେବଦାରୁ ଗଛଗୁଡ଼ାଏ ଥାଏ । ସେତେବେଳେ ବିଜୁଳିବତୀ ଆମର ନଥିଲା । ଦେବଦାରୁ ଗଛର ଡାଳ ଦେଇ ଚିତ୍କାର କରୁଥିବା ପବନ ଓ ବାଦୁଡ଼ିମାନଙ୍କର ହଇଚଇ ମୋ ପାଖକୁ ଅଜଣା ଭୟସବୁକୁ ବୁହାଇ ଆଣୁଥିଲା । ପଢ଼ା ଘରେ ରାତିର ଅନ୍ଧାରରେ ପଢ଼ିବାକୁ ବସିଥିବା ବେଳେ କିରାସିନି ବତୀର ଛାଇ ମୋର ଏବେ ବି ମନେ ଅଛି । ଏ ସବୁ କିଛି ମୋ' ଭିତରେ ଏମିତି ଭୟ ଭରିଦେଲା ଯେ, ତାହା ଭିତରୁ ମୋତେ ବାହାରିବାକୁ ବହୁତ ସମୟ ଲାଗିଗଲା । ଏବେ ତ ସବୁଠି ବିଜୁଳି ଆଲୁଅ ହାଉଯାଉ । ଅନ୍ଧାର ଯେ ଜୀବନର ଅଂଶ, ତାହା ସ୍ୱୀକାର କରିବା ହିଁ ମୋତ ସେଇ ଭୟରୁ ମୁକ୍ତି ପାଇବାର ଶକ୍ତି ଦେଲା । କିନ୍ତୁ ଅନ୍ଧାର ଏବେ ବି ମୋ କବିତାର ଏକ ପ୍ରିୟ ରୂପକ; ଅଜଣା ଯେଉଁଟା, ଅନ୍ୟାୟ ଯେଉଁଟା, ସେଇଟାକୁ ମୁଁ ଅନ୍ଧାର ପରି ଦେଖି ଆସିଚି ।

ପ୍ରଶ୍ନ  – ଓଡ଼ିଆ କାବ୍ୟଜଗତ ବୋଲି ନୁହେଁ, ଭାରତୀୟ କାବ୍ୟଜଗତରେ ବି ଯଦି ଆପଣ ଦେଖିବେ, ବୋଧେହୁଏ ପର୍ସିଆନ୍ କବିତାରୁ କି କେଉଁଠି ଆସିଛି କି ନାହିଁ ଜଣା ନାହିଁ ମୋତେ, ଶହର୍ ଓ ଶହ୍‌ରା ଭିତରେ ଗୋଟେ ବିରାଟ ବଡ଼ ତଫାତ ଅଛି । ଯେଉଁଠି ସହର ହେଲା ସବୁ ବିନିର୍ମିତ ଜିନିଷର ଘର । ଆଉ ପ୍ରକୃତି ତେଣୁ ସହରରୁ ପୂରା ବାହାରେ । ଏଣୁ ଆମେ ଆମ ସାହିତ୍ୟରେ ସହର ଓ ପ୍ରକୃତିକୁ ଏକାଠି ପ୍ରାୟ ଦେଖି ପାରୁନା । କିନ୍ତୁ ଆପଣ ଯେତେବେଳେ ନିଜ ଆତ୍ମଜୀବନୀରେ ସମ୍ବଲପୁର ବିଷୟରେ କହୁଚନ୍ତି, କିମ୍ବା କଟକ ସମ୍ପର୍କରେ କହୁଚନ୍ତି - ଏଇ କଟକର ଗଛ, ଲତା, ପୋଖରି, ସକାଳ, ସନ୍ଧ୍ୟା, ପକ୍ଷୀ ଆଦି - ପ୍ରକୃତି ଆପଣଙ୍କର ସହରର ଅନୁଭୂତିର ବର୍ଣ୍ଣନାର ଗୋଟେ ବିରାଟ ବଡ଼ ଅଂଶ । ତାହା ଆପଣଙ୍କ କବିତା ବିଷୟରେ ମଧ୍ୟ ସତ୍ୟ । ଆପଣଙ୍କର ଏଇ ସହରୀ ପ୍ରକୃତି ସହିତ (ଯଦି ସେପରି ଆମେ କହି ପାରିବା) ସମ୍ପର୍କ ବିଷୟରେ ଆପଣ କିଛି କୁହନ୍ତୁ ।

ଜୟନ୍ତ ମହାପାତ୍ର – ଦେଖୁନା ମୁଁ ମୋ' ଘରକୁ କେମିତି କରି ପକେଇଚି । ବାଉଁଶ ଗଛ ଲଗେଇଚି ମୁଁ । ଆଉରି ଏବେ ଗଛ କାଟି ଦେଲି କାରଣ ସରୋଜିନୀର ଘର କରିବା ପାଇଁ ଜାଗା କରିବାକୁ ଟିକେ ଗଛ କାଟି ଦେଇଚି । ସାହାଡ଼ା ଗଛ, ପିଜୁଳି ଗଛ, ଆମ୍ବ ଗଛ... - କିଛି ଆମ୍ବ ଗଛ ମହାବାତ୍ୟାରେ ଯାଇ ଥିଲା; ଆଉ କିଛି ଥିଲା ଯାହା ଏଇ ବାତ୍ୟାରେ ଚାଲି ଗଲା । ଆଉ ମୁଁ ଜାଣିନି, ଗାଁ ପ୍ରତି ମୋର ବହୁତ ନିବିଡ଼ ସମ୍ପର୍କ ରହିଚି । ସେଇଟାକୁ କେବେ ବାଦ ଦେଇକି ମୁଁ ବଞ୍ଚି ପାରିବିନି । ଘର ପାଖରେ ମୋର ଅଳିଆମଳିଆ ହେଇକି ପତର, ଗଛ - ସବୁ ଆସିବ, ଆସିଯାଏ ଭିତରକୁ । ବର୍ଷା ଯେତେବେଳେ ହୁଏ, କାଲି ଯେତେବେଳେ ଝଡ଼ ହେଲା, ମୁଁ କବାଟ, ଖିଡ଼ିକି ସବୁ ମେଲେଇ ଦେଲି । ମୁଁ ଚାହିଁଲି କି ପବନ, ଘଡ଼ଘଡ଼ି, ବିଜୁଳି ଭିତରକୁ ଆସୁ; ଯେ ଧୂଳି ବି ଭିତରକୁ ଆସୁ । ମୋତେ କଟକର ଧୂଳି ମନ୍ଦ ଲାଗେନା । ମୋତେ କଟକର ବଞ୍ଚିବାର ଛଟକ ମନ୍ଦ ଲାଗେନା । ହେଲେ ଯେବେ ସବୁ କିଛିକୁ ଶୀଘ୍ର ବଦଳି ଯିବାର ଦେଖେ, ମୋତେ ବହୁତ ଖରାପ ଲାଗେ । ଗଛ ସବୁ ଚାଲିଗଲା । ନଦୀ ଦୁଇଟା ପାଖରେ ଅଛି  । ଏକଦମ ବନ୍ଧ ତଳକୁ ପାଣି ଥିଲା । କାଠଯୋଡ଼ି ବି ସେଇଆ ଥିଲା, ମହାନଦୀ ବି ସେଇଆ ଥିଲା । ମୁଁ ଷାଠିଏ, ସତୁରି ବର୍ଷ ତଳର କଥା କହୁଚି । ଏତିକି ଭାବିଲା ବେଳକୁ ଛାତିରେ କେମିତି ଗୋଟେ ଚାଉଁ କିନା ଲାଗେ । ଏମିତି ବଞ୍ଚି ହୁଏନା । ମୋତେ ତ ଏବେ ଲାଗୁଚି, ମୁଁ ଯେମିତି ଗୋଟେ ପୂରା ଅଲଗା ପରିବେଶରେ ବଞ୍ଚୁଚି ।

୨୦୧୧ ମସିହାରେ କଟକର ଗୋରାକବର (ୱିକିମିଡିଆ କମନ୍ସ୍)

ମୁଁ ପାଟନାରେ କଲେଜରେ ଯେତେବେଳେ ପଢ଼ିଲି, ବିହାରରେ, ସାଙ୍ଗମାନେ କହନ୍ତି, ‘କଅଣରେ ତୁ ଓଡ଼ିଆ । ମଗଧର ରାଜା କେମିତି ଯାଇକି ତୁମମାନଙ୍କୁ ଧ୍ୱଂସ କରିଦେଲେ ।’ ମୋ ମନ ସେତେବେଳେ ଭାରି ଦବି ଯାଉଥିଲା । ସେ ଯୋଗୁ ମୁଁ ଅଶୋକଙ୍କୁ କେବେବ କ୍ଷମା ଦେଇ ପାରିନି ।  କ୍ଷମା ଦେଇ ପାରିନି ମୋ ଭୂଇଁର ଲକ୍ଷେ ଲୋକଙ୍କର ହତ୍ୟା ପାଇଁ । ଏ ଭୂଇଁ ମୋର ବୋଲି ମୁଁ ଭାବେ। ଏଣୁ ଅଶୋକଙ୍କୁ କ୍ଷମା ଦେବା ସମ୍ଭବ ନୁହେଁ । ଯେତେବେଳେ ଟ୍ରେନ୍‌ରେ ମୁଁ ପାଟନାରୁ କଟକ ଆସେ ଛୁଟିରେ, ଯେତେବେଳେ ବାଲେଶ୍ୱର ପାଖାପାଖି ହେବ, ଓଡ଼ିଆ ଭାଷା ଶୁଭିବ । ତମ ଛାତି ଭିତର କଅଣ ହେଇଯାଏ । ଏତେ ଖୁସି ଲାଗେ କି ନିଜ ଘରକୁ ଫେରିଚ ବୋଲି । ସେଇ ଯୋଗୁ ଓଡ଼ିଶା ପ୍ରତି ମୋର ବେଶି ମମତା ଅଛି । ମୁଁ ଯେତେବେଳେ ପିଲା ଥିଲି ଓଡ଼ିଆ କେବେ ମୋର ନଥିଲା । ଖାଲି ଭାଷା ଯାହା କିଛି କହୁଥିଲି ଘରେ । ନ ହେଲେ ମୋର କିଛି ନ ଥିଲା ଓଡ଼ିଶାର । ସେଇଥି ପାଇଁ ଯେଉଁ ପ୍ରଜାପତିକୁ ମୁଁ ପିଲାବେଳେ ଧରି ରଖି ପାରିଲିନି, ତାକୁ ପରେ ଆବୋରି ବସିବାକୁ ଚେଷ୍ଟା କଲି ।

ପ୍ରଶ୍ନ - ୱାଲଡେନ୍ ଆପଣଙ୍କର ଗୋଟେ ବହୁତ ପ୍ରିୟ ବହି ବୋଲି ଆପଣ ଠାଏ ଲେଖିଚନ୍ତି । ଆପଣ ସମ୍ବଲପୁରରେ ତାହାକୁ ପ୍ରଥମେ ପଢ଼ିଲେ । ଆପଣଙ୍କ କବିତାରେ ତ ପ୍ରକୃତିକୁ ନେଇ ଗୋଟେ ବିରାଟ ବଡ଼ ଧାରା ଅଛି । କେତେ ଆଲୋଚନା ହେଇଚି ମୁଁ ଜାଣିନି । ବୋଧ ହୁଏ ହୋଇ ନାହିଁ । ଆପଣଙ୍କୁ ଜଣେ ପ୍ରକୃତି କବି ଭାବରେ ମଧ୍ୟ ଗଣାଯାଇପାରିବ । କିନ୍ତୁ ଆପଣ ସଚେତନ ଭାବରେ ଯେତେବେଳେ କବିତା ଲେଖିବା ଆରମ୍ଭ କଲେ, ସେବେ କଅଣ ପ୍ରକୃତି ବିଷୟକ କବିତା କିଛି ପଢ଼ୁଥିଲେ ?

ଜୟନ୍ତ ମହାପାତ୍ର – ନା । ହେଲେ ମୋର ଏହି ଭୂଇଁଟି ପାଇଁ ଯଥାର୍ଥ ଅନୁରକ୍ତି ଅଛି । ଏଇ ଦୁଇ ବର୍ଷ ତଳେ ମୁଁ ଛଅ ଶହ କିଲୋମିଟର ଯାଇ କୋରାପୁଟ ବୁଲାବୁଲି କରିକି ଆଇଲି । ଏବେ ଫୁଲବାଣୀ ଯାଇକି ବୁଲି ଆଇଲି । ଜଙ୍ଗଲ, ଜଳପ୍ରପାତ, ଆଦିବାସୀ ଗାଆଁ, ମୋତେ ତାଙ୍କ ସହ ଯାଇଁ କଥା ହେଇ ଭଲ ଲାଗେ । ଏବେ ଦୁଇ ମାସ ତଳେ, ଅମୀୟରଞ୍ଜନ ମହାପାତ୍ର, ମୁଁ, ସୁବୋଧ ନାୟକ, ଅମରେଶ ପଟ୍ଟନାୟକ, ଆମେ ସବୁ ଏକାଠି ଏଇ ବାରଙ୍ଗ ଜଙ୍ଗଲକୁ ଯାଇ ଭିତରେ ପଶି ଆଦିବାସୀ ଗାଆଁରେ ବୁଲାବୁଲି କରିକି ଆଇଲୁ । ମୁଁ ଜାଣିନି ମୋତେ କାହିଁକି ଏ ସବୁ ଭଲ ଲାଗେ । ତାହାର କାରଣ ମୁଁ ଖୋଜି ବାହାର କରିବା ସମ୍ଭବ ନୁହେଁ ।... 

ବି.ଦ୍ର. - ଏହି ସାକ୍ଷାତକାରଟି ୨୦୧୯ ମସିହାର ମଧ୍ୟ ଭାଗରେ ନିଆଯାଇଥିଲା । ଇଂରାଜୀରେ ଏହାର କିୟଦଂଶ 'ଦି ହିନ୍ଦୁ' ଖବରକାଗଜର ଏକ ରବିବାସରୀୟ ଅଙ୍କରେ ତଥା ସମ୍ପୂର୍ଣ୍ଣ ଓଡ଼ିଆ ରୂପଟି ସାହିତ୍ୟ ପତ୍ରିକା 'ପଶ୍ଚିମା'ର ୨୦୧୯ ମସିହାର ପୂଜା ସଙ୍ଖ୍ୟାରେ ପ୍ରକାଶିତ ହୋଇସାରିଚି । ସାକ୍ଷାତକାରଟିର ସର୍ବସତ୍ତ୍ୱ ଜୟନ୍ତ ମହାପାତ୍ର ଓ ଶୈଲେନ ରାଉତରାୟଙ୍କ ପାଖରେ ସଂରକ୍ଷିତ ।

Anuvada of the Prose Section of Chapter 66 of 

'Mahimandala Gita' by Arakkhita Das 

Translated by Sailen Routray

Bell of the Vedanta Temple at Santa Barbara (Wikimedia Commons)

If one sees what can/should not be seen, if one builds/lifts what can/should not be built/lifted, if one does what can/should not be done, if one eats what can/should not be eaten, if one says repeatedly what can/should not be repeatedly said, if one, therefore, masters what can/should not be mastered; if one is able to do all this, then one may know that, through the filter of one’s own experiences. 

Let us tell you what one does after one has known that through the filter of one’s own experiences – one does not bother about what one eats and where one sleeps; one does not bother about the eye, the nose, the face, the ears and the organs for excretion, the five aspects of the psyche and the twenty-five prakritis, the eleven indriyas, the six great enemies and the three gunas; one does not bother about sickness, one does not bother about sin, non-sin, merit, non-merit, dharma, non-dharma, heaven, hell, the auspicious, and the inauspicious, truth, non-truth, greed, non-greed, kama, non-kama, the virtuous and the non-virtuous, gain, non-gain, essence, non-essence, vikaara and non-vikaara, jaati and non-jaati, the masculine and the non-masculine, the feminine and the non-feminine, the living and the non-living, the chanted and the un-chanted. 

Listen! Having known that through the filter of one’s own experiences, one never again bothers with all these ever again. The embodied being, and the ultimate, Chandra, Surya, Brahma, Vishnu, Shiva, Indra, Sachi, Yama, Kubera, Varuna, Nairuta, Brihaspati, the ten Dikpalas, the constellations, the clouds, the heavens, the earth and the nether worlds; water, fire, air, and the sky; listen, oh mind, one never bothers with any of these. 

Vedanta Temple at Montecito, California (Wikimedia Commons)

The four Vedas, Yoganta, Vedanta, Siddhanta, Naganta; listen, oh mind, one never practices any of these. Only if one knows that one does not bother with chanting, contemplation, worship, reflection, meditation, mantras, yogasutras, pilgrimage, austerities, and fasting. 

One does not bother with the numerous places of pilgrimage, the numerous fasts, the numerous styles of yoga, knowledge, meditations, devotions, contemplations, chantings, offerings, mantras, markings, substances, gods, chandis, ghosts and witches; listen, oh mind, one does not practice anything related to any of them, one does not fear them nor does one worship them; one sees them all as equals, and realises that there is nothing in the world apart from me. 

I am spread throughout the world; I am that; realising thus, one sees all as equal, the numerous trees, flowers, fruits, soils, stones, birds, animals, insects, fish, flies, horseflies, cows, buffaloes, boars, deers, horses, elephants, goats, sheep, pigs, cats, dogs; the many forms of rats, snakes, smaller animals, ants, termites, lizards,  scorpions, humans, gods, rakshasas, weapons, texts, Puranas, Gitas, musical instruments, debates, Vedas, Jyotishas, indulgences, maladies, dances, songs, musical instruments, clothes, cuisines, the six rasas, the eight metals, the nine gems, the six seasons, the static and the dynamic; the ones that fly and the ones that swim, the numerous varieties of insects and flies, all the fifty-six crore species of creatures from all the four directions; one sees them as equals and in doing so, one sees them as that. 

If one finds such a person then one can rest assured that such a person abides in that. Such a one does not drown in water; even Agni does not burn him, the strongest of the winds do not make him fly, swords do not hurt him; even if the earth decays, his being does not decay, it becomes the heavens, the earth, the nether worlds, it seeps into the fifty-six crore species of creatures and can attain varied forms intermittently; the seven worlds become like grass to him; Brahma, Indra, Chandra, Surya, none equal him, the thirty-three crore gods, humans, rakshasas the earth, water, teja, vayu, akash, nothing equals his essence. 

Leaf from a Manuscript of Mandukya Karika by Goudapada
(Photo Credit - Wikimedia Commons)

Therefore, oh mind, listen to the grace of devotion; one who has an empty mind knows that, knows nothing apart from that, knows the world to be that, wanders alone and shuns company, has that for company, feels only that, has no fears and knows nothing apart from that, so that one knows only that and doing so meditates in that, sleeps in that, sings in that; therefore, oh mind, listen to what you wanted to hear. 

Such a person knows that which is singular in form, how can anyone else know that; in fact, no one can know that, as that does not have colour, eyes, face, ears, nose, eyes, hands, legs, heart, belly, waist, back, head or skin, form, marks, blood, flesh; being beyond sight, speech, colour, air, form and repetition; listen, oh mind, no one sees that without devotion. 

All the jivas are eroded out from that and on death go back to rest in that. In death lies birth; now let us explicate with an analogy; if we take a pot with some sweetened water in it to a pond, and then empty the pot into the pond, and fill the pot with water from the pond, then does the water in the pot taste sweet? 

Likewise, once a form dissolves it never returns; there is no birth after death, once this body goes, it is never to be had again; therefore only if you abide in the body, then you can know that which is singular in form. Listen, oh mind, feel everything with equanimity and abide in the singular in form without any vikaara, for that is unrecognisable for a mind that has an iota of vikaara... 

Painting Depicting Hamsa Avatar of Vishnu
Miniature Painting by Mahesh from Chamba (c 1725-50)
Photo Credit (Wikimedia Commons)

Note

The text presented above is as act of anuvada of the three prose pages of Chapter 66 of 'Mahimandala Gita' by Arakkhita Das. This was published in 2007, accompanied by a larger note, in Sarai Reader 07: Frontiers. This volume was edited by Monica Narula, Suddhabrata Sengupta, Jeebesh Bagchi and Ravi Sundaram. It was published at Delhi by Centre for the Study of Developing Societies. 

While annotating this anuvada, intricate endnotes have been avoided, and the names of the gods and a few words, such as vikaara and indriya have been left unexplicated and untranslated. The word Brahman has been translated as ‘that’, with italicisation. This has been done in the interest of fluency as well as to avoid imposing the conceptual weight of monism that the word (which connotes a metaphysical absolute) is generally made to carry. This is also in consonance with the general Upanishadic practice of referring to Brahman as tat (which can be translated as 'that'). The syntax has also been suitably amended so as to assist in the process of anuvada, i.e., the retelling of the narrative again and again; the aim has been to maintain the mantra-like tonality, or the incantatory effect of the text. 

Copyright of the English translation rests with the translator. 

A View from the Annapurna Base Camp
Photo Credit (Wikimedia Commons)

Glossary:

Agni: The fire-god of the Hindu pantheon

Akash: One of the five constitutive elements of the Hindu, more accurately Samkhya, Universe

Brahma: The creator god

Brihaspati: The teacher (guru) of the gods.

Chandi: (a class of lesser female gods in Hinduism that express the sacred feminine in its most powerful aspects)

Chandra: The moon-god

Dikpalas: The ten deities in charge of the ten directions

Guna: Generally translated as qualities, it can also mean properties or elements

Indra: The most important god in early Vedic religious practice

Indriya: generally translated as sense organs. Can also mean the faculties of the organs

Jaati: Most of the time translated as caste; a better rendition will be ‘a class of things’

Jiva: life or something possessing life

Kama: desire or the god of desire

Kubera: The god of wealth

Nairuta: The south-western direction

Prakritis: According to Samkhya philosophy, components of the primordial lmatter. Often prakriti is translated as ‘ nature’.

Puranas: Hindu and Jain epics that deal with the genealogies of mythical kings, and gods, and also provide descriptions of cosmology and philosophy that were primarily composed between the 3^rd century ac to the 17^th century ac

Rakshasa: a class of beings traditionally opposed to the gods in Indian mythology

Sachi: Another name of Indra

Shiva:The god of destruction, one of the’ trinity’ of the three most important male Hindu gods

Surya: The sun god

Teja: The god of effulgence or the sun’s rays

Varuna: An early Vedic god traditionally associated with water and the sea

Vayu: The god of wind/air

Vikaara: In Vedanta philiophy vikara is a modification/differentiation of the supreme or a modification from any natural state. Generally it has a negative connotation and can signify deterioration. In Samkhya philosophy vikaara is the outcome of a process of transformation of an entity from its origin, i.e. prakriti. Vikaara in Buddhist formulations means the characteristic  condition of the genetic material qualities

Vishnu: The preserver god of the Hindu trinity

Yama: The god of death

Yogasutra: The most famous yogasutra is purported to be authored by Patanjali. In the context of this text it refers to any set of codified spiritual practices

The Mahimandala Gita, Chapter 66, by Arakkhita Das 

Notes towards a Translation

Sailen Routray

Front inside cover of a 1970 edition
of Mahimandala Gita (Wikimedia Commons)

Arakkhita Das occupies a unique place in Orissa’s rich tradition of saint-poets. He was born into the ruling family of the big zamindari of Badakhemundi in Ganjam district of coastal Orissa towards the end of the eighteenth century; various sources place his year of birth between 1780 and 1788, more likely towards the later date. He grew up in tumultuous times, when the British were finally gaining ascendancy in Orissa; and perhaps his renunciation from his privileged context took place at approximately the same time as the British conquest of Orissa in 1803. But he seems to have left home and taken formal sanyas (permanent renouncing of worldly life/status of a householder) after the death of his father in a battle with the British, and of his uncle’s subsequent ascent to the throne. He wandered around coastal Orissa for some time before settling down on the Olasuni hill in the Kendrapada district; he never left it again (Das 2004).

Das left behind no disciples and no sect. He stands at an odd angle to the spiritual tradition of Orissa, and simultaneously symbolises a bridge as well as a rupture from the tradition. On one hand, his work marks the apogee of the tradition of saint-poets whose members include such stalwarts like Jagannatha Das (who translated the Shrimad Bhagbat Puranam into Oriya) and Balaram Das (who translated the Ramayana into Oriya). This tradition represents a synthesis of extant spiritual systems as well as a conscious reformulation of the sacral in the idiom of the ‘vernacular’ that parallels other so called ‘bhakti’ traditions elsewhere in India in the same period of time. 

Yet perhaps what was distinctive about this tradition was the absorption of bajrayana symbolism and ‘mysticism’ into a predominantly Hindu formulation surrounding Lord Jagannatha, Puri, and not Hindu-Islam syncretism as is generally formulated.  His work foreshadows the later radical work of Bhima Bhoi (1855 – 1895), the author of texts such as Stuti Chintamani,  Nirbeda Sadhana, Brahma Nirupana Gita. Bhima Bhoi was the most prominent disciple of the Mahima Gosain, the founder of the Mahima religion popular among the subaltern groups of western Orissa and Chhatishgarh. Bhoi’s work marks a radical rupture with the extant Hindu spiritual traditions of Orissa as he completely negates the authority of the Vedas. Arakkhita Das’s work due to its radical negation of the scriptures similarly marks a critical rupture with the earlier traditions, and asserts its commonality with the work of Bhima Bhoi).

However, Das makes a few greater ‘transgressions’ as well; for example, he denies the very existence of something like the transmigrating atman/soul or indestructible essence (evident from this quotation from the text translated later in this article that says, ‘once a form dissolves it never returns, there is no birth after death’). He also denies the necessity of any conventional spiritual ‘practice’, and posits instead the necessity of a direct, and almost childlike perception into the nature of reality (see translation below).

Das has left behind quite a voluminous amount of poetry that is yet to be properly catalogued and published in its entirety. His most popular work is titled Mahimandala Gita, or The Gita of the Earth. It is quite a remarkable text for many reasons, the most important of which is perhaps the fact that within it we catch glimpses of Arakkhita Das as a person grappling with the same set of mundane and existential problems  that all humans have to confront), but ultimately managing to soar above.

A Map Describing the British Annexation of India
(Photo Credit - Wikimedia Commons)

For me, though, the significance of this text lies tucked within the brief confines of Chapter 66. Most intriguingly, it includes three pages written in the tradition of Oriya ‘prose’ texts such as The Chatura Binoda (most probably written in the last quarter of the eighteenth century) by Brajanatha Badajena (1730-1800) and Rudra Sudhanidhi by Abadhuta Swami written in the latter half of the fifteenth century.

From a vantage point within the tradition of ‘modern’ Oriya literature of the early twenty-first century, these texts are not written in prose at all; they are curious hybrids, wayward mongrels, creatures of the badlands of the frontier, that defy categorization and refuse to be slotted as either prose or poetry. But if one compares these texts with the comparatively voluminous prose produced in Oriya in the latter half of the nineteenth century, one is struck by the lucidity and lightness of touch of the former when compared to the rigidity and staidness of the more ‘modern’ prose of the latter period (ibid).

This comparison has to be contextualised within a history in which the very syntax of Oriya prose was shaped by the activities of missionaries who attempted to standardise Oriya prose. The standardisation was attempted via the imitation of English models, and the process of imitation continued for quite some time. For instance, the word prabandha that in the pre-colonial period denoted a composition (sometimes in ‘prose’ but, more often than not, in ‘poetry’) came to mean that most European of all prose artefacts – the essay. In fact, these linguistic efforts involved a process of translation – not only of texts themselves, such as the Bible and other works crucial to the evangelical domain, but also of literary genres, forms and syntax.

Till very recently the debates in translation studies have been framed around the questions of meaning, authenticity and fidelity, and have ignored questions of power and history in the context of colonialism. Theorists such as Tejaswini Niranjana have tried to problematise this discourse by positing translation as a political act; this is done by expanding the notion of translation to include questions of language, representation and power in a very broad sense, and by attempts at liberating the practice of translation from the fidelity/betrayal binary (Niranjana, 1992).

But such a reading of translation both as discourse and process is hedged from the beginning by the limited historical horizon that it chooses to work under. Translation as a practice is not a colonial/Western invention. Most modern Indian languages have had a very strong tradition of translation; in fact, it may be argued that most modern Indian languages were configured as contemporary entities through sustained acts of translation. 

A sketch of the samadhi of Arakkhita Das
(Photo Credit - Wikimedia Commons)

In the case of Oriya, two texts assume salience – a translation of the Mahabharata in the second half of the fifteenth century by Sarala Das (the pen name of Siddheswara Parida), and a translation of the Bhagabata by Jagannatha Das (c 1490 – c 1550). The former text is the first substantial literary work in the language, whereas the latter work ‘standardised’ the Oriya language to the extent that it can be described as the ‘Great Wall of China’ for Oriya literature. It created a style so powerful, and the reach of the text was so all pervasive that the language of the Bhagabata became the standard Oriya; it successfully appropriated a Sanskritic idiom and vocabulary in order to create a formal structure of linguistic usage that most later writers were seduced into using (Das 1995). 

This translation was completely in verse and can be located as poetry whereas the translation of the Mahabharata was in a metrical form called the dândi brutta that, despite being a verse form, can enable a text written in it to be read as either prose or poetry. Later, Balarama Das used the same metrical form to translate the Ramayana into Oriya (Das 2004).

Therefore, such processes of ‘translation’ were central to the formation of Oriya as a literary language; this can perhaps be tentatively generalised for other modern South Asian languages as well. This seems to be central to what can perhaps be termed as the ‘translation effect’ through which modern South Asian languages were standardised. This fact is glossed over in the perceptive discussion by Sheldon Pollock, (the eminent American Sanskritist and South Asianist) on the formation of the ‘cosmopolitan vernacular’ towards the middle of the second millennium of the Christian era.

Pollock picks up the case of Kannada, and argues that starting with the beginnings of the last millennium regional kingdoms started to occupy the political place occupied by supra-regional empires earlier; whereas Sanskrit was the language of the empires and the newly emerging regional kingdoms were characterized by the emergence of vernacular literatures. But he merely observes this, and does not theorize the relationship between language and power as he rightly points out that the theories available to us to make sense of the relationship between the two have emerged in the context of capitalist modernity, and one is open to the charge of historical anachronism if one carries this conceptual apparatus to understand pre-modern phenomena. 

But he rightly debunks the hypothesis that posits a correlation between the ‘vernacularisation’ of South Asia, and the growing use of the modern Indian languages by the emergent popular religious  movements movements that supposedly challenged what is commonly known as Brahminism and its fiercely entrenched liturgical and social orthodoxies (Pollock, 1998).

Palm-leaf manuscript with a stylus (Wikimedia Commons)

This is also borne out by the fact that despite the importance of the saint-poets, the most voluminous and classically ‘literary’ work (here it is pertinent to keep in mind the kavya/shastra dichotomy, texts that entertain versus texts that educate or enlighten) in Orissa in the pre-colonial period was produced by the regional elite, who wrote kavyas in imitation of the Sanskrit models, yet precisely in opposition to the ‘Sanskrit Cosmopolis’ (the ‘Sanskrit Cosmopolis’ is an concept proposed by Pollock to describe the way Sanskrit was imbricated as a dominant aesthetic-political language across South and South-east Asia associated with a family of political and social practices like temple building etc. from nearly a thousand years starting with the third century of the 1^st millennium. 

He uses the concept of the Cosmopolis to counterpoise it against the concept of empire for describing certain types of socio-political formations).  This literary tradition, in a bid to outperform the virtuosity and complexity of Sanskrit kavyas, produced ornate pieces that often dealt with heavily eroticised themes. The prose that was forged in the aftermath of the colonial encounter seems to have been a reaction to this corpus, and was therefore, perhaps, more amenable for imitating contemporary English prose forms and genres, rather than drawing upon the extant tradition of Oriya ‘prose’.

Thus, a text such as Chapter 66 of the Mahimandala Gita lies in the twilight zone of the ‘modern’ division between prose and poetry, and functions as an exemplar by which to challenge the boundaries of such formal categories in literature. This particular example of Oriya ‘prose’ also lies towards the end of the tradition of which it is a part. Henceforth, we get prose that is as self-confessedly ‘virile’ as the English models that it tried to successfully imitate.

Note: This is an introduction to a translation of chapter 66 of the ‘The Mahimandala Gita' by Arakkhita Das, published in 2007, in Sarai Reader 07: Frontiers. This volume was edited by Monica Narula, Suddhabrata Sengupta, Jeebesh Bagchi and Ravi Sundaram. It was published at Delhi by Centre for the Study of Developing Societies. The translation of the relevant chapter will be carried in the near future in another post on this blog. Copyright of this essay rests with the author. 

References

Das, Arakkhita. Mahimandala Gita o Gupta Tika (Dharmagrantha Store, 1997, Cuttack).

Das, Chittaranjan. Sri Arakkhita Das: Eka Addhyana (Orissa Sahitya Academy, 2004, Bhubaneshwar). 

Das, Hara Prasad. Adhunikatara Parampara: Hara Prasad Dasanka Sahitya Charcha (Bharata Bharati, 1995, Cuttack).

Mishra, Nilamani (ed). 1989. Atibadi Jagannatha Dasakruta Shrimad Bhagabata Prathama-Dvitiya Skandha. Bhubaneswar: Orissa Sahitya Academy. 

Mohanty, Artaballabha Mohanty. 1966. Sarala Dasanka Mahabharata. Bhubaneswar: Department of Culture, Government of Orissa.

Mohanty, Janaki Ballabha. 2002. Mahatma Bhima Bhoinka Kruta Satika  Stuti Chintamani. Cuttack: Orissa Jagannatha Company.

Mohanty, Jatindra Mohana. 2006. Oriya Gadya Sambhara  (Bhubaneswar, 2006). Self-published by the author with a grant  from the Central Institute of Indian Languages, Mysore.

Niranjana, Tejaswini. Siting Translation: History, Post-Structuralism, and the Colonial Context (University of California Press, 1992, Berkeley/Los Angeles/Oxford). 

Pollock, Sheldon. “The Cosmopolitan Vernacular”. In The Journal of Asian Studies 57 (1), pp. 6-37 (1998).