Dhananjaya and his Dwi Sadhana

Author(s): A N Upadhye
Publisher: Z_Acharya_Shantisagar_Janma_Shatabdi_Mahotsav_Smruti_Granth_012022.pdf
Catalog link: https://jainqq.org/explore/250073/1

Page #1
DHANANJAYA AND HIS DVISANDHANA Dr. A. N. UPADHYE, Kolhapur Two distinguished authors, of the name Dhananjaya, are well known in Sanskrit literature. One is the author of the Dasarupakal and the other, the author of the Dvisandhana-kavya (DS), also called Raghavapandaviya (RP). Traditionally, the Jatter is also the author of two more works, one a Sanskrit lexicon, Namamala or Dhananjaya-nighantu,; and the second, a hymn in Sanskrit, Visapahara-stotra,+ in praise of the Jina, possibly Rsabha. Lately a good deal of fresh evidence has come to light; and it is necessary to take stock of the evidence regarding the DS and the age of Dhananjaya. This, the present article attempts to do. Dhananjaya and his DS have attracted the attention of eminent Sanskrit scholars since almost the ninteties of the last century. K. B, Pathak, while editing the Terdal Inscription,5 added a casual note that Srutakirti Traividya, mentioned in that record, is identical with Srutakirti Traividyadeva referred to by Pampa according to whom he was the author of RP in the gata-pratyagata style. He identified Dhananjaya with Srutakirti and assigned him to c. 1123 A. D. He repeated this view rather elaborately in a subsequent paper also.6 R. G. Bhandarkar noticed two Mss. of DS.7 Accepting Dhananjaya as the anthor of the Namamala as well, he pointed out that DS is quoted in Vardhamana's Ganaratnamahodadhi (A. D. 1141), Presuming that the RP of Kaviraja was possibly imitated by Dhananjaya, he put both of them between A. D. 996-1141, Dhananjaya being considerably younger than Kaviraja. E. V. Vira 1. Nirnaya Sagara Press Edition, Bombay, Saka 1819. 2. Nirnaya Sagara Press, (Kavyamala. No. 49), Bombay, 1895. A new edition will be soon published by the Bharatiya Jnanapitha, Varanasi. 3. Bharatiya Jnanapitha, Benares, 1950. 4. Edn. Kavyamala No. 7, N. S. Press, Bombay, 1926. 5. Indian Antiquary, 14 (1885), 14-26. 6. The Journal of the BBRAS, 21 (1904) 1-3. 7. Report on the Search of Skt. Mss. in the Bombay Presidency during the years 1884-85, 1885-86, and 1886-87, Bombay, 1894. 303

Page #2
304 A. zAMtisAgarajI janmazatAbdi smRtigraMtha Raghavacharya8 reached the conclusion that Dhananjaya, the author of the Namamala and DS, flourished about 750 to 800 A. D., later than Kaviraja whom he assigns to 650-725 A. D. A. Venkatasubbiah studiously refuted K. B. Pathak and reached the following conclusions. This Dhananjaya is identical with Hemasena (c. 985) mentioned in the Sravana Belgo! Inscription No. 54 (67) where he is called VidyaDhananjaya. In his opinion, it is not unlikely that this Hemasena is the author of the RP or the DS-Kavya, and that it was written some time during A. D. 916-1000. He puts Kaviraja and his RP somewhere between A. D. 1236-1307, as against Pathak who assigned him to A. D. 1182-97. Most of the histories of Sanskrit literature have quietly adopted this date for Dhananjaya. Among the three works attributed to Dhananjaya, the Visapahara-stotra is a devotional hymn in praise of Jina, presumably Vrsabha, in 40 Sanskrit verses (39 Upajati and the last Puspitagra). It is composed in lucid language with catching concepts. The last verse mentions the name of the author by slesa : vitarati vihitA yathAkathaMcijjina vinatAya manISitAni bhaktiH / tvayi nutiviSayA punarvizeSAd dizati sukhAni yazo dhanaM jayaM ca // 40 // A Sanskrit commentary on it is available in the Jaina Matha at Moodabidri (S. Kanara). The hymn gets its title possibly from the first word in verse No. 14; and a legend has come to be associated with this hymn that a recitation of it is an antidote against poison. Some of the ideas from it, which are quite traditional in their spirit, as noted by Pt. Premi,10 seem to have been adopted by Jinasena in his Adipurana and by Somadeva in his Yasastilaka. The Namamala, also called, in some of its manuscripts, Dhananjaya-nighantu, is a Sanskrit lexicon of synonyms. There is also an Anekarthanamamala attributed to him. The follwing verses occur at the end of his Namamala: pramANamakalaGkasya pUjyapAdasya lakSaNam / dviHsaMdhAnakaveH kAvyaM ratnatrayamapazcimam // 201 // kaverdhanaJjayasyeyaM satkavInAM ziromaNeH / pramANaM nAmamAleti zlokAnAM hi zatadvayam // 202 // 8. Journal of the Andhra Historical Research Society, (Rajahamundry), 2. ii (1927) 181-84. 9. JBBRAS (New Series 3, i-ii (1927) 134 f. 10. Jaina Sahitya aur Itihasa, pp. 109 s., Bombay, 1956.

Page #3
305 Dhananjaya And His Dvisandhana brahmANaM samupetya vedaninadavyAjAt tuSArAcalasthAnasthAvaramIzvaraM suranadIvyAjAttathA kezavam / apyambhonidhizAyinaM jalanidhidhvAnopadezAdaho phUtkurvanti dhanaJjayasya ca bhiyA zabdAH samutpIDitAH // 203 // In some manuscriptsll the following two verses are found added after, perhaps, No. 201, Pramanam etc. : jAte jagati vAlmIko zabda kaviriti smRtaH / kavI iti tato vyAse kavayazceti daNDini // kavayaH kapayazceti bahutvaM dUramAgatam / vinivRttaM cirAdetat kalau jAte dhanaJjaye // It is interesting to note that the first verse, with the third pada slightly different (Vyase jate kavi ceti), is attributed to Kalidasa by Jalhana in his Suktimuktavali.19 it could not have been composed by Kalidasa, because it contains a reference to Dandin, Dhananjaya, as noted above, ranks his poetic abilities with those of Akalanka in Pramanasastra and of Pujyapada in grammar: a veritable triad of gems, two of them his outstanding predecessors. These verses leave, no doubt, that the author of the DS and of the Namamala is one and the same. It seems quite natural that a poet with a thorough mastery over the ocean of Sanskrit vocabulary could easily compose a dvisandhana poem. Dhananjaya does not give any auto-biographical details. Nemicandra, in his commentary on the DS,13 118-146 states that Dhananjaya was the son of Vasudeva and Sridevi and pupil of Dasaratha. It is necessary to put together references to Dhananjaya and his works so that some broad limits can be put to his date. Dhananjaya and his works have received sufficient praise; and his poem was so distinguished that he came to be called Dvisandhana-kavi. The term dvisandhana seems to be as old as Dandin (c. 7th century A. D.); and Bhoja's observations quoted below clearly indicate that Dandin also, like Dhananjaya, had a Dvisandhana-prabandha to his credit, though it has not come down to us. Possibly, it was Dandin's third work besides the Kavyadarsa and the Dasakumaracarita. 11. See the paper of Vira Raghavacharya mentioned above. 12. Edn., GOS, No. 82, Baroda, 1938, p. 45. 13. Nemicandra's commentary is included in the Inanapitha edition which would be published soon.

Page #4
A. zAMtisAgarajI janmazatAbdi smRtigraMtha Vardhamana (A. D. 1141) quotes DS (of Dhananjaya) 4.6.,9.51., 18.22, in his Ganaratna-mahodadhi 435, 409 and 97 of Eggeling's edition. 306 Bhoja (middle of the 11th century A. D. ), while discussing the Ubhayalankara, gives the valuable information that Dandin wrote a Dvisandhana-prabandha on the storties of the Ramayana and Bharata. 1 Cf. tRtIyasya yathA daNDino dhanaJjayasya vA dvisandhAnaprabandhau rAmAyaNamahAbhAratArthAvanubadhnAti (?) For our purpose what is significant is that Bhoja mentions Dhananjaya and his DS along with Dandin and his DS-Prabhandha. Prabhacandra (11th century A. D.) refers in his Prameyakamalamartanda to the DS thus : 15 nanu vyAkaraNAdyabhyAsAllaukikapadavAkyArthapratipattau tadaviziSTavaidikapadavAkyArthapratipattirapi prasiddherazrutakAvyAdivat / tanna vedArthapratipattAvatIndriyArthadarzinA kiJcitprayojanamityapyasAram / laukikavaidikapadAnAmakatve'pyanekArthatvavyavasthiteranyaparihAreNa vyAcikhyAsitArthasya niyamayitumazakteH / na ca prakaraNAdibhyastanniyamasteSAmapyanekapravRtterdvisandhAnAdivat / Vadiraja, in his Parsvanathacarita, 16 composed in A. D. 1025, refers to Dhananjaya and his skill in more than one sandhana: anekabhedasandhAnAH khananto hRdaye muhuH / bANA dhanaJjayonmuktAH karNasyeva priyA katham // 1.26 // Durgasimha ( c. 1025A D.), the author of the Kannada Pancatantra, 11 refers to the RP of Dhananjaya in these words: anupamakavitrajaM jIyene rAghavapAMDavIyamaM peLUdu yazovanitAdhIzvaranAdaM dhanaJjayaM vAgvadhUpiyaM kevaLane // 7 // Dr. B. S. Kulkarni, Dharwar, informs me that the palm-leaf manuscript of the Pancatantra from Arrah does not contain all those verses referring to the earlier poets. Scholars are divided in their opinions whether there was only one Nagavarma or there were two at different times (A. D. c. 1090 and c. 1145), with some or the other works assigned to them. We get the following verse in his Chandombudhi,18 a work in Kannada on metrics: 14. V. Raghavan, Bhoja's Srgaraprakasa, ( Madras, 1963), p. 406. 15 Ed., N. S. Press, (Bombay, 1912), p. 116, lines 1 ff.; Bombay 1941, p. 402. 16. Ed. Manikachandra D. J, Granthamata, No. 4, Bombay, 1926. 17. Mysore, 1898. 18. R. Narasimhacharya, Karnataka Kavicarite, ( Bangalore, 1961), pp. 53 ff., 154ff.

Page #5
Dhananjaya And His Dvisandhana 307 jitabANaM hariyaMtadhaHkRtamayUraM tArakArAtiyaMtatimAgha zizirAMtyadaMte surpproccNddkodNdddN-| te tirobhUtaguNADhayanabjavanadaMtAvirbhavaiMDi bhA ratadaMtAttadhanaJjayaikavibhavaM vAgguMphadoLU nAkigaM // Dhananjaya is mentioned here among earlier poets. Narsimhacharya thinks that this is a reference to the author of DS, but A. Venkatasubbiah opines that the author of the Dasarupaka is intended. Jalhana (c. 1257 A. D.) in his Suktimuktavali19 puts in the mouth of Rajasekhara (c. 900 A. D.), the following verse about Dhananjaya : dviHsaMdhAne nipuNatAM sa tAM cakre dhanaJjayaH / yayA jAtaM phalaM tasya satAM cakre dhanaM jayaH // 7 // This splitting of the name of the author into dhanam and jaya is quite in tune with what the author himself has done in his works. As already pointed out by Dr. H. L. Jain, 20 Virasena quotes a verse useful for explaining the term iti, and it is the same as No. 39 of the Namamala of Dhananjaya. The above references enable us to fix the limits for the age of Dhananjaya. He must have flourished between Akalanka (7th-8th century A. D.) and Virasena who completed his Dhavala in A. D. 816. Dhananjaya may, therefore, be assigned to c. 800. In any case, he could not be later than Bhoja (11th century A. D.) who specifically mentions him and his DS. The DS of Dhananjaya has 18 cantos, comprising of 1105 verses composed in various metrical forms, his favourite forms being Upajati, Vasantatilaka, salini, Svagata etc. The benedictory verses in the beginning remembers (Muni-) Suvrata or Nemi, and then Sarasvati. The story of both Rama and the Pandavas is covered in this work, usually taking recourse to slesa (double entendre ). It is a characteristic so usual with Digambara Jaina authors that the tale is said to be narrated by Gautama to King Srenika. The author !ays more stress on dignified descriptions than on the narration of events. Most of the verses are embellished with figures of speech, and they are duly noted by the commentator. In the last canto (especially, verse No. 43 onwards) the author has illustrated many of the Sabdalankaras, a trait common with Bharavi, Magha and other poets. The verse No. 143 is an illustration of sarva-gata-pratyagata. Presuming that the colophons found at the end of the cantos (but not at the end of cantos 1, 2, 16 and 18 ) belong to the author himself, it is clear that he gives himself the name Dhananjaya, or Kavi, or Dvisandhana-kavi and calls his poem Dvisandhana 19. Ed., GOS, No. 82. Baroda, 1938, p. 46. 20. Satkhandagama with Dhavala. vol. I. (Amraoti, 1939), Introduction, p. 62; Ibid., vol. VI, p. 14.

Page #6
ROC A. zAMtisAgarajI janmazatAbdi smRtigraMtha -kavya, or the Raghava-Pandaviya - (a second name, apara-nama ) Mahakavya. At the close of every canto, in the last verse, he mentions his name Dhananjaya by slesa, as in the Visapahara-stotra; this is already imitated by Rajasekhara in the verse put in his mouth by Jalhana. The title Dvisandhana indicates the pattern of composition in which each verse is susceptible to two interpretations, and the appellation Raghava-Pandaviya connotes the contents of the poem viz., that it deals with the tales of Rama and the Pandavas simultaneously. The cycle of tales connected with these two are so much an inseparable part of Indian cultural heritage that any poet who wants to pick up two topics at one and the same time, would easily turn to them, especially because independent epics dealing with them and giving plenty of details and contexts for alternative selection and presentation are available in large numbers. The title Raghava-Pandaviya is sufficiently popular. Beside Dhananjaya, it has been chosen by poets like Kaviraja, Srutakirti etc.; and there are also similar titles, e. g, Raghava-Yadaviya, Raghava-Pandava, Yadaviya, etc. With Dhananjaya, however, the primary title for his kavya is Dvisandhana; and and he, after 'Dandin, seems to be the pioneer of this type; the Ragdava-Pandaviya is only a secondary title. It is interesting to compare the poems of Dhananjaya and Kaviraja.91 Dhananjaya's kavya has an alternative name RP which is the sole title of Kaviraja's poem. Dhananjaya has eighteen cantos with 1105 verses, while Kaviraja has thirteen with 664 verses. Dhananjaya mentions his own name byslesa (thus marking his kavya Dhananjayanka'), while Kaviraja mentions the name of his patron Kamadeva in the last verse of each canto: in fact the latter's poem is Kamadevanka'. A detailed comparison of the contents of these two poems is a desideratum. On a cursory reading one feels that there is not much striking similarity between them. Dhanamjaya has more of descriptions, while Kaviraja narrates the details of his tale successfully inspite of the handicap of slesa (see 1. 54, 69, etc.). So far as slesa is concerned, Kaviraja shows more skill and mastery over vocabulary. Dhananjaya's poem is complimented as a monument of poetic excellence': undoubtedly, he shows a good deal of learning, especially of the nitisastra; and some of his arthantaranyasas are really profound and striking. As contrasted with Kaviraja's style, which is lucid and delightful, (cf. 2.11-13), Dhananjaya writes rather heavy Sanskrit which often needs some effort to understand. In his descriptions, there are very few verses of double entendre which are the normal feature of Kaviraja's composition. As far as we have seen, there is very little between these two poems as to suggest that one is an imitation of the other. There is one more poet, srutakirti Traividya, who wrote a Raghava-Pandaviyakavya of the gatapratyagata pattern, a matter of curiosity and wonder among the 21. Edn. N. S. Press, Bombay, 1897, with the commentary of Sasadhara, Kavyamala, No. 62.

Page #7
Dhananjaya And His Dvisandhana 309 learned, as mentioned by Nagacandra or Abhinava Pampa in his Ramacandra-caritaPurana, 39 in Kannada, also known as Pampa-Ramayana ( 1.24-23): AvAM vAdikathAtrayapravaNadAL vidvajjanaM maeNcca vidyAvaSTaMbhamanappu paravAdikSoNibhRtpakSamaM / devendraM kaDitaMdadiMdai kaDidaM syAdvAdavidyAstradi vidyazrutakIrti divyamunivol vikhyAtiyaM tAdidaM // 24 // zrutakIrtitraividyavrati rAghavapAMDavIyamaM vibudhacamatkRtiyenisi gatapratyA gatadiM peldamaLakIrtiyaM prakaTisidaM // 25 // These two verses are quoted in an inscription at Sravana Belgol No. 40 (64), of A. D. 1163.28 This Srutakirti Traividya is mentioned in the Terdal inscription of 1123 A. D. tatu paravAdIbhapaMcAnanara sadharmaru / zrutakIrtitraividyabratipar SaTutarkakarkazaru paravAdipratibhApradIpapavanar jitadoSar negaLdarakhilabhuvanAMtaradoLa // King Gonka sent for Maghanandi Saiddhantika (the preceptor of Nimba Samanta) of Kollagiri or Kolhapur, and the latter's colleagues were Kanakanandi Panditadeva and Srutakirti Traividya. In another inscription of A. D. 1135, from Kolhapur, Srutakirti Traividya is referred to as the Acarya of the Rupanarayana Basadi of Kolhapur :34 zakavarSada sAsiradayvatteMTaneya rAkSasasaMvatsarada kArtikabahulapaMcami somavAradaMdu zrImUlasaMghadesIyagaNapustaka gacchada kollApurada zrIrUpanArAyaNabasadiyAcAryarappa zrIzrutakIrtitraividyadevar kAlaM karci etc. Nagacandra calls him a vrati and so also the Terdal inscription; i. e., he was a vratin in 1123, but by 1135 A, D, he had reached the status of an Acarya. Expert opinion puts Nagacandra near about A. D. 1100.25 This means that Srutakirti's age ranges from c. 1100 to 1150 A. D., approximately. So far no manuscript of his RP has come to light. K. B. Pathak was the first to postulate the identity of Dhananjaya and srutakirti from the latter's having composed the Raghavapandaviya. Rightly enough, R. G. Bhandarkar hesitated to accept this identity. But somehow the date proposed for Dhananjaya based on this identity attained currency. 22. A Ms. is being used, but the text is available in printed form. 23. Epigraphia Carnatica, Vol. II, Sravana Belgol Inscriptions. 24. Epigraphia Indica, Vol. 19, p. 30. 25. R. Narasimhacharya, Karnataka Kavicarite, vol. I, (Bangalore 1961), pp. 110f.

Page #8
310 A. zAMtisAgarajI janmazatAbdi smRtigraMtha Dhananjaya and his DS or RP have to be distinguished from Srutakirti and his RP. First, Dhananjaya was a householder, while Srutakriti, a vratin and later an Acarya. Secondly, neither Dhananjaya nor the sources which mention Srutakirti give any evidence to suppose that the two names stand for the same poet. Thirdly, a verse from Dhananjaya's Namamala is quoted by Virasena (A. D. 816); and his DS, specifically mentioning the name Dhananjaya, is referred to by Bhoja (c. 1010-62 A. D.), while the period of Srutakirti ranges from 1100 to 1150 A. D. Lastly, if the DS of Dhananjaya is already famous to be ranked with the work of Dandin and to be referred to by Bhoja (middle of the 11th century), it cannot be the same work as that of Srutakirti who was an Acarya in 1135 A. D. So this identification has no basis; and therefore, the date, based on this identity proposed for Dhananjaya, namely 1123-40 A. D., has to be given up. E. V. Vira Raghavacharya's suggestion of the date for Dhananjaya (c. 750-800) is nearer the point, but it is not known why he puts Kaviraja earlier than Dhananjaya when Kaviraja specifically refers to Munja of Dhara (973-95 A. D.). Prof. Venkatasubbiah's thesis, viz., that Dhananjaya, the author of DS, is identical with Hemasena because the later is mentioned as Vidya--Dhananjaya in the Sravana Belgo! Inscription, cannot be accepted. Vadiraja is mentioning in his poem earlier authors and teachers and not necessarily his pontifical predecessors. That Dhananjaya therefore, was a pontifical predecessor of Vadiraja and identical with Hemasana is not justified. First, Dhananjaya was a householder. He has not at all mentioned his ascetic line, nor does he speak about his ascetic predecessors; he cannot, therefore, be a pontifical predecessor of Vadiraja. Secondly, nowhere in his works, has Dhananjaya given his name as Hemasena. Lastly, it is very doubtful whether Vidya-Dhananjaya is a proper name, for it could be read as well vidya dhanam jayapadam visadam dadhano. It is also possible that Dhananjaya here means Arjuna; so Hemasena is Vidya-Dhananjaya. If at all Vidya-Dhananjaya is a proper name, then, it means that it only distinguishes Hemasena from some other Dhananjaya who flourished earlier.