surrender 10 brief appeat to my mind is ideal for od ¢ morass of boredom and Ido not think the bargain. Before-clos ers, exuded too much may keep away ma hing nal ambience which in turn jewers. Could nor this have been avoided? Too K.K. Handiqui: Scholar Par Excellence Krishnakanta though all his indiqui needs no introdi nto any in Assam, ig books away from miums. Even now, and sundry revere this noble man's memory. We consider ourselves fortunate to have had such a redoubtable scholar in our midst, Everytime I remember Krishnakanta Han of Assam whose death anniversary f ist and bibliophile Max Milller by Nirad C. Chaudh versial yet supremely readable Indo-Anglian author. Chaudhu ‘Max Miller the "Scholar Extraordinary’. To my mind to few others inour re closely than to the Handiqui. And between "Scholar " of our projection and "Scholar Extraordinary’ there could only be some distinction without 4 substantial difference, Itfneeds saying, extraordinary’ carries the ike that of Krishnakanta Handiqui's. Which, however, is beyond our immediate concern. ch to judge scholarship or, more of a true scholar No two the more the ry parlance) there are ¢, KK Handiqui,A Manin Barkoroki Miscellany who has authored not more than three major works in his fairly long for being described as a scholar. three expository and analytical books, none of which really tome as tomes go. ‘Was there anything fortuitous about it? No, and thereby hangs s they say. Itis true that a scholar is best assessed by another scholar. Tam no scholar, not even an academic, and as far as Handi ‘isdietion in the Sanskri concerned, my ignorane iy aby ct dare to rush into such forbidden territory, I do so under two alibis if you will. One is, what does he know of Sanskrit or even scholarship, who only Sanskrit and scholarship knows? Secondly, although Handiqui was an erudite Sanskrit scholar, pethaps second only to our own vener: Anundoram Borooah, he expressed himself mainly in English, in which he excelled in lucidity and clarity, Besides, did not Handiqui take his Master's degree at Oxford in Modern History and not in Sunskrie which he made his life's work? If that be so, there is no harm if a non- ‘academic mere admirer and nondescript literary practitioner dares to iatempr a layman's essay on Handiqui's stature as a scholar. Incidentally, it is worth remembering that K:K.Handiqui was not w Professor, though he was referred t0 as such by every’ other aademie as he came to be regarded. Still more, although any number of D. Litt causa came to be conferred on him by several univer was Vice-Chancellor, he ever remained, simple Mr, Hundiqui became no Doctor®, And history knows about the many of hy several reas Vice-Chancellor. Gathati University. — Ed “4 ns On educational philosophy and educatio tration of this founding Though Handiqui pro. dissertations und surveys, wrote numerous views for journals, contributed greatly prized introdk aces to many prestigious publ valuable key-note addresses ental und! educational conterences Research Institute and the Bhanda and cultural antholo- and foreign bodies, sical scholar rests pring as T have mentioned earlier, on his three main publications, namely the Naisadhacarita (1934), Ya the Serubandlia (1976), in that order While the first and the third of the three are model specimens of translation of ancient Sanskrit and Prakrit texts, the second Yasastilaka — is a rare example of what one cl cultural commentary, Mind you, the tran: dertook tions, So. inacvess Naisadha and Setubcindha remained ti rosen to Ieave them alone till then, They were be tackled by a scholar of Handiqui's calibre. The ‘try nuances and philosophical intricacies embedded in the classics which Handiqui displayed in this obscure terrain immediately Landed him in the forefront of the classical scholars of his time and si neously raised his status from just a scholar to a scholar pur excel: nce. But Handiqui’s scholarship would’ not have been half as re- ‘books hed abroad. purticularlymarkal ose two recondite yet most ancient treatises, which masterpieces to be savoured pleasurably for gener But he was not a Sanskrit scholar alone. His Yas Indian Culture, within its moderate limits, bore witness to the fact that KK. Handiqui was more than a scholar, He was a polymath ‘who, grounded in the bedrock of Sanskrit and Indian culture, could not only rerider abstruse ancient lore into luminous present-day idiom, but also distil the quintessential wisdom of the ages in simple unclut- tered language It will be wrong, however, to suppose that Handiqui's wide- ranging studies and research were confined to Sanskrit and ancient lore alone. Knowing proficiently nearly a dozen classical and modern Indian and European languages as he did, the range of his studies was as vast as it was deep. Moulding his scholarship on his most cherished ‘German, he was nothing if not thorough-going and penetrating in his studies, sparing no pains to delve deep into whatever he learned. And it was amazing how with this characteristic itch for German thorough- ness and comprehensiveness he could at the same time extend his horizon to embrace art und archaeology, painting and sculpture, phi- losophy and religion, doctrinal Buddhism and Jainism in his stride. If hhe acquired mastery over the literary nuances and lexicographical intricacies of Sanskrit and Prakrit, he was equally at home in estimat- ing the artistic excellence of medieval illuminated manuscripts, cal- ligraphy as well as stylised paintings of the Rajput and Kangra schools Yer most of us feel atthe same time that such a person and such outstanding scholarship deserved better recognition and greater ap- preciation from the rest of the country and the outside world. The Government of India was tardy and niggardly in giving Handiqui his due in his lifetime offering him a measly Padma Bhusan when few deserved a Padma Bibhushan more than him, For Handiqui's tife and 46 ar Par Exvellence work was never limited to the confines of his own state and as a schol if not in quantity, did much more for Indian classi : bearing though an Oxford ‘graduate of the early twenties, his identity as an Assamese wa lost and subsumed in his Indianness Here was a scholar trom the back-waters of Assam who could ake a point or two on art or aesthetics with the versatile Ananda Coomaraswamy or seek cl tion on some knotty problem of phi- losophy or ontology from Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan. Not for nothing did the great linguist Suniti Kumar Chatterji say "Handiqui was a scholar of whom India could be proud.” And did not that great Indophille n historian of the wwas a “ven! wish Handiqui upto the age of one hundred and twenty years? Alas that was, not to be, and the venerable Orientalist passed away in 1982, When comes such another? ;