Kant’s Aesthetic Theory: In the Light of Indian Poetics

The paper deals with Kant’s notion of Aesthetics as reflected in his Critique of Judgment and its elucidation. An effort has been made to show some affinities between Kant and Indian aestheticians with special reference to literary form of art. Beauty is pleasurable since pleasure is defined as a feeling that arises on the achievement of purpose. Kant describes purposiveness as perceived both in the object itself and in the activity of imagination and understanding of their engagement with the object. Aesthetic judgments are disinterested. There are two types of interest- by way of sensation in the agreeable and by way of concepts in the good. Aesthetic judgments are free or pure only of any such interests. Aesthetic pleasure is not limited by the specific individual and hence it is considered as universal. Aesthetic judgment behaves universally, i.e., involves an expectation or claim on agreement of others. According to Kant, beauty may also remain in ‘sublime’. It is said by Kant that when an object gives us pleasure is called beautiful. Viśvanātha is of the opinion that something which is source of pleasure is called beautiful. Such pain or other sentiments are impersonal one, but not personal. Had it been personal, the experience of pain and other feelings would have arisen in himself. Personal pain makes a man crippled while impersonal pain empowers him with creativity. According to Kant, aesthetic pleasure is disinterested and universal, which is completely admitted by the Indian Aesthetician. Actually, it is observed by us that when a drama or film is enacted or shown in the auditorium, there are persons of diverse taste, status and mood, but it is astonishing to note that all are enjoying the drama or film equally. A spectator can share the feelings of the characters and lose himself.