Some Aspects of Kaumudimitranand

Author(s): V M Kulkarni
Publisher: ZZ_Anusandhan
Catalog link: https://jainqq.org/explore/269112/1

Page #1

Some Aspects of the Kaumudimitrāņanda
- V. M. Kulkarni Rāmacandra, one of the celebrated desciples of Acarya Hemacandra, carried out this literary activities in the second half of the twelfth century A.D. He wrote, besides other plays, three prakarana type of plays :
1. Rohinimrgānka 2 Kaumudimitrānanda and 3. Mallikāmakaranda. Of these, Rohinimrgānka is all lost but for a small, single passage, ciled by the author himself in the Nātyadarpana (a work on Sanskrit Dramaturgy by Rāmacandra himself and Guņacandra, another disciple of Hemacandra written jointly) with the introductory remark:
यथा वाऽस्मदुपज्ञे रोहिणीमृगाङ्काभिधाने प्रकरणे प्रथमेऽङ्के -- "मृगाझं प्रति T: — 44R ! H SUS 8T:
उन्मत्तप्रेमसंरम्भाद्, आरभन्ते यदङ्गना ।
तत्र प्रत्यूहमाधातुं, ब्रह्माऽपि खलु कातरः ॥' It is cited to illustrate the third Sandhyanga of the Mukhasandhi, called Parinyāsa. Rămacandra has adopted this verse, without acknowledgement, from Bharthari's Srngārašataka (v. 75, N. S. ed)
In translation it means :
"When women through impetuosity (of flurry) of intoxicated love set about some task, even God Brahman is indeed unable (lit. afraid) to place an obstacle in their way. (Then what to talk of others ?)"
2. Mallikämukarandanāțaka : This play is available in full.? It is published by L. D. Isnstitute of Indology, Ahmedabad.
3. Kaumudimitrānunda. This play too is available in print.
In this article it is proposed to draw the attention of readers to some striking aspects of this prakaruņa. Before proceeding with this topic, it would not be out of place to take note of Keith's observations regarding "The Decline of the Sanskrit

Page #2

311 -819. 76 Drama" : "The audience for whose approval a poet looked was essentially one of men of learning who were intent on discerning poetic beauties or defects, and who had singularly little idea of what a drama really means." For the decline of the drama, he adds, "the ever widening breach between the languages of the drama and those of real life" has greatly contributed and furthur points out "the impossibility of the production of real poetry, not to mention drama, in deud languages."
Now, the audience was essentially one of learning and that the Prakrit languages were no longer spoken languages is no doubt true but to say that they had singularly little idea of what a drama really means' and that Sanskrit too, like the Prakrits, was a dead language is rather unfair and unjust. Although Sanskrit was not the language of the masses, it certainly was the language of a class, though limited, of a highly educated and cultured men of learning and that like the poets they very well knew what a drama according to Bharata means. Bharata gave the highest importance to rasas in drama : 'na hi rasādrte kaścid arthah pravartate.' (Everything in drama is oriented towards creating rasah.) Abhinavagupta and following him Rāmacandra, hold that ‘rasāh nātyapråņāḥ (Rasas are the very life, the very essence of drama.) His charge that 'Subordination of action to description, and the degeneration of the description into a mere exercise in style and in the use of sounds' is exaggerated. That way it may apply to some earlier poets as well. To tell the truth, Indian poets and dramatists and their poetic and dramatic works should be judged by norms and criteria laid down by Indian writers on poetics and dramatics and not by western standards or principles. It would certainly be unjust and unfair to evaluate the Indian authors and their works by applying western principles or standards.
Kaumudimitrānanda -is a prakarana type of drama in ten Acts. It mainly deals with the love-story of Mitrānanda, the son of a wealthy merchant by name Jinasena, a resident of Kautukanagara, and Kaumudi, the doughter of the Kulapati (head of a monastery). Mitrāņanda and Maitraya after the shipwreck come to the island of Varuna. There they free from imprisonment the Siddha King

Page #3

SHYT-819.77 who was nailed to a tree by Varuņa suspecting him to be desirous of his wives who are not seen even by the sun (asūryampaśya). Kaumudi, the daughter of the Kulapati falls in love with Mitrānanda at first sight and reveals to him the fact that the asceties in the monastery are pseudo-ascetics and that the fate of her husbands so far to fall and perish into the well hidden under the bed in the nuptial chamber. In his case smitten by love she proposes to run away with him carrying with them the treasure collected from her former husbands' to Lankā. In Lankā the plight of the pair would have been miserable since Mitrāņanda is taken for a robber by the city police if Mitrānanda, had not saved the yuvarāja (crownprince), Laksmīpati, from death by snakebite with the aid of the magical lore, called hālāhalahari vidyā given to him to revive the dead by the goddess Jānguli on the occasion of his (Mitrăņanda's) marriage with Kaumudi.
The King in gratitute entrusts the pair to the minister Kamarati, who, however, is enamoured of Kaumudi and is very enxious to get rid of her husband. The opportunity is given him by a human sacrifice which a feudatory by name Vijayavarmā of the king wishes to perform. Kámarati sends Mitrāṇanda to him as upahāra-purusa (victim) but Maitreya luckily recognises him. Maitreya was his companion. He had won the favour of Vijayavarmā by curing him with the aid of a magical herb. Kaumudi in the meantime is ixpelled from the minister's house by his jealous wife and wanders untill she meets Sumitrā, daughter of a merchant, and her family. Vajravarman, a chief of the abotigines, captures them all. One Makaranda, who turns out to be a friend of Mitrānanda, is also broght to this Vajravarman.
A letter from Laksmipati inquiring about the welfare of Mitränanda and Kaumudi is received; and Kaumudi takes advantage of this letter and includes Vajravarinan to celebrare the marriage of Makaranda and Sumitră--who have fallen in love with each other at first sight. The three then have an adventure at Ekacakrā town with a Käpälika who persuades the women to go into a *pātālabhavana' (subterranean apartment) while he asks Mitrānanda's
heep against a Vidyādhara, described as strengly desirous of women.

Page #4

37THET-81978 He (the Kāpālika) breathes life into a corpse which takes a sword in its hand but Mitrañanda by a magic formula induces it to strike the Kāpalika who suddenly disappears. Next, Makaranda has to establish before yuvarāja Lakşmipati his claim to his own carawan, which a certain Naradatta claims (wrongfully). The dispute is settled by the arrival of Vajrasvāmin and Mitrāņanda. Finally husband and wife are united at the residence of the Siddha King. The story of Kaumudi and Mitrāņanda forms the main plot whereas that of Sumitrā and Makaranda, the byplot.
In the āmukha (=prastāvanā, Introduction) to his Kaumudi. Mitrānanda we are told that he is a pupil of the great Hemacandra; he is proficient in writing a hundred prabandhas (literary compositions) he is always and ever diligent in writing poetical works, he has composed the prakarana type of drama, called Kaumudimitrāņanda; it is a treasure of a thousand Kurūhalas (curiocities; Kusūhalawhat excites curiocity, anything pleasing or interesting, Kurūhala); it excites-evokes-stimulates-enkindles all kinds of sentiments-rasasand feelings-bhāvas; and adds that it is his (Rāmacandra's) second rūpaka (dvitiyam rūpakam); (Satyahariscandra being his ādirūpakafirst rūpakaļ.... there are episodes and incidents in plenty that would, one after another, excite the curiocities of the (trained) audience; of course, it is for the Stage-director (Sutradhāra) to decide whether is overflowing with rasas and whether there are many situations and episodes that would excite feelings. In reply to the assistant's (nața) statement the Stage Director says:
What to say (=there is no need to say anything) about the prakaruna overflowing with rasas.
Are there not many great poets, Murāri and others like him, who are ever deligent in composing plays-dramatic poems-that are sweet on account of their skillfulness in new and novel (and striking) modes of speech ? But I doubt if there is any other poet than Rāmacandra who is capable and skilled in creating various rasas to their highest-point, which are the very life and soul - the essence - of dramatic works. Moreover, “The dramatic compositions (of other poets), like sugarcane, progressively deminish in rasa (1 Sentiment 2 Juice); but Ramacandra's dramatic poem

Page #5

अनुसंधान - १७• 79
grows progressively sweeter and sweeter still.”
The assistant (nața) contemptually says:
"These days there are writers who borrow words and ideas (from earlier poets) and thereby attain fame. Consequently, how can the good people trust them ?"
The Stage Director replies: "My (good) friend, this question does not arise in my case. In this matter the intelligent and wise contemporary men alone are the authority."
This Introduction (amukha) reveals the boasting nature of Rămaçandra and his rather low opinion of his predecessors like Murări, and his self-confidence that no critic can point an accusing finger at him for plagiarism or literary theft, and that his works, imbued as they are with rasas, make interesting reading and give delight to the readers. Again, in the Second Act we have the following remark of Maitreya :
अहो समृद्धकुतूहलानुबन्धः प्रबन्ध |
Act II, V. 6, 1. 11 (p. 19) "O, how rich is his dramatic composition presenting curiosities, one after another ?"
-
This remark (and similar remarks in his other plays) reveal that the poet Rămacandra was intensely emotional and self-conscious and that it was difficult for him to escape his own shadow and maintain a purely objective attitude in his writings. In writing this prakarana Rāmacandra had in mind Bhavabhuti's Malatimādhava. It is not surprising, therefore, if he consously or rather unconsiously follows this trait revealed in Bhavabhuti's writings.
Rāmacandra's References to his favourite deityLord Rṣabha
Rămacandra was a devout Jain. It is, therefore, natural that he should give expression to his deep reverence to Rṣabhadeva, the adi-tirthankara of the Jains. In the Nandi verse he says: 4: प्राप निवृति क्लेशाननुभूय भवार्णवे I तस्मै विश्वैकमित्राय त्रिधा नाभिभुवे नमः ||

Page #6

3TLET-8980
(Tr. I pay homage in three ways to Lord Rşabha, that peerless of matchless friend of the whole world who, after having experienced sufferings in the ocean of wordly existence, attained emancipation-- final beatitude.)
In the course of the developement of the plot he respectfully refers to Lord Rşabha half a dozen times :
(1) p. 25 : TGT: hoe part motoren urt: TUTA! (2) p. 51 : torpet Tai TEIG Roi dat g: Ufo: (3) p. 90: i picantant Renazzangufa 1 (4) p. 91 : raffinata 7: Ferug mit Hith all (5) p. 123 : un Filenamgi da 46014
There is one reference to the very sacred mantra in which (five) parameșthins are paid homage to by the Jains. (The five dignitaries are : 1. Arhat 2 Siddha 3. ācārya 4. upadhyaya and 5 sādhus) :
अपिनाम कोऽप्यपाय: संभवेत्, तदहं परमेष्ठिनाम पवित्रं मन्त्रं स्मरामि ।
"If any calamity is likely to visit or befall, I remember the sacred mantra in which five dignitaries are paid homage to."
At another place the temple of Kātyāyani is described in such a way as to produce disgust (p. 45, v. no. 12), and the Saivite School of Kāpālikas who indulged in the offerings of animals and even human beings is targetted. Probably, the poet here betreys the influence of Bhavabhūti who in his Malati-Madhava mentions how Kapālakundalā carries away Mālati, the heroine of the play from her bed-chamber to be immolated and sacrificed before the goddess Karālā Câmundā by her teacher Aghoraghanta.
Kaumudimitrāṇanda : a Prakaraņa Bharata and after him many writers on Dramatics have defined the various types of Drama (rūpaka) in their works. The Dasarūpaka of Dhanamjaya is very popular with the commentators on Sanskrit dramas. Following their tradition we reproduce below the definition of a Prakarana given by Dhanamjaya :
अथ प्रकरणे वृत्तमुत्पाद्यं लोक संश्रयम् । अमात्यविप्रवणिजामेकं कुर्याच्च नायकम् ॥

Page #7

37TH -819 81 धीरप्रशान्तं सापायं धर्मकामार्थतत्परम् । शेषं नाटक वत्संधिप्रवेशक रसादिकम् ॥ नायिका तु द्विधा नेतुः कुलस्त्री गणिका तथा । क्वचिदैकेव कुलजा वेश्यावापि द्वयं चित् ॥ कुलजाभ्यन्तरा बाह्या वेश्या नातिक्रमोऽनयोः ।
आभिः प्रकरणं त्रेधा संकीर्णं धूर्तसंकुलम् ।। Now, in a prakarana the subject matter should be invented, and should be drawn from worldly life (lokasamśrayam); the playwright should make a minister, a Brāhmaṇa or a merchant the hero; he should be of the type called 'dhirapraśānta' (selfcontrolled and calm) undergoing some misfortune (Sāpāya) and striving after (tatpara) dharma (virtue) kama (pleasure) and artha (wealth). The remaining features or characteristics-such as Sandhi (junctures) or praveśaka (introductory scenes) or rasas (sentiments) are as in the nataka). The heroine (nāyikā) is of two kinds, the high-bom wife of the hero or a courtezan. In some plays there is only the high-born lady, in some the courtezan, and in some plays, both; the high-born lady is always) indoors (abhyantarā), the courtezan out of doors or without (bāhyā) and the two never meet (nätikramo' nayoh). Owing to these three kinds (of the heroine) the prakarana is of three kinds or varieties. The mixed variety abounds in dhürtas (rogues).
Thus the Kaumudimitrānanda is a Suddha (Unmixed, not contaminates by another woman's contact) prakarand where the heroine is Kaumudi, the daughter of Kulapati-the head of a monastery. Incidentally, Māltimādhava, where there is the heroine, Mālati, the high-bom maiden. Tarangadatta (now lost) where a courtezan alone is the only heroine is equally a Suddha prakarana The Mrcchakatika, however, is a Samkirņa (mixed) prakaranawhere we have both types of heroine, Dhütā, Cārudatta's wife is a high-born nāyikā; Vasantasenā, a courtezan is another and most noteworthy heroine. And further, this play is full of dhūrias (rogues) as well.
In the play under our study, Kaumudi, the most beautiful woman, daughter of Kulapati is the heroine; Mitrānanda the son of a

Page #8

3TTHET-8982
devout Jain householder Jinadāsa who is fabulously rich by birth and is a citizen of Kautukamangala nagara is the hero. Mitrānanda is portrayed as self-controlled and calm (dhira-praśānta) and striving after dharma, artha (wealth) and Kama (pleasure). Kaumudi falls in love with the hero at first sight. Disregarding the interests of her own father who and his followers are pseudo-ascetics but, in fact, robbers. Her father apparrently marries her to rich Sārthavāha merchants whenever they visit him. Poor fellows fall into the well, covered under bed, in the nuptial chamber and perish. She elopes, with the treasure collected from the supposed husbund's, with the hero. Calamities after calamities visit both of them. They bravely face there calamities and are ultimately united and enjoy pleasures of love. This account forms the main story-main plot, and the story of Makaranda, the heroe's trusted and beloved friend and Sumitrā who are destined to be married, by lucky accident come together. The story of Makaranda and Sumitrā constitutes the byplot and furthers the cause of the main hero.
The amukha (Introduction) claims that this rūpaka (play) is *Kutuhalsahasra-nidhānam' and 'niśšesa-rasa-bhāva-pradipakam.' When we go carefully through the whole play we notice that most of the incidents are Kathā incidents. They excite our interest, curiosity and in that sense they are 'Kurthala-Sahasra-nidhana' but one must admit that they hardly form dramatic incidents.
The other claim made in the āmukha on behalf of the poet that it is nissesa-rasa-bhāva-pradipaka' is rather exaggerated. Every reader would agree with us when we say that there is a lack of humour throughout the play. May be, the poet is serious by nature and consequently he simply cannot create humour or humorous situations. Being a muni, possibly he felt it rather awkward and improper to portray vividly the erotic sentiment (Srangārarasa). The hero is 'dhira-prašānta'. By his very nature he is against fighting a war. For example, towards the end of the sixth Act we are told of the impending war-night attack by the enemy on Vijayavarmā's army. But the next Act informs us why the fight as such does not take place between the two warring groups.
We have instead a scene which excites the sentiment of fear.

Page #9

अनुसंधान - १७• 83
It is rather easy for Ramanadra to depict the sentiments of fear (bhayānaka) bibhatsa (Disgust) of marvell or wonder (adbhuta), when occasion arises he depicts the sentiments of roudra (the furious) and the pathos (karūṇa). One very convincing illustration of the depiction of the bibhatsa sentiment may be cited here. The description of the temple of Katyayani (Act IV V V-123, pp 45-46) is very graphic and creates disgust in the mind of the readers or spectators when the play is enacted on the stage.
Kaumudimitrāṇanda: Appreciation
Kaumudimitraanda is an extravagantly fanciful composition. The supernatural or magical element plays a dominent role througout the play. It presents so many marvallous incidents appealing to the audience and contributing to the sentiment of wonder or the marvellous (adbhuta-rasa) right from the beginning to the end. Thus the Siddha King nailed to a tree by Varuna, the regent of the ocean, is set free from imprisonment by means of a jem of mysterious power. Again, Maitreya has won the favour of the King's vassal by curing him by a magic herb. Kaumudi is attracted to Mitraṇanda, her prospective husband by the lovecharm he had received from Varuna. She and Mitrāṇanda flee to Lanka. There the pair would have been in miserable plight. Since Mitrānanda is taken for a thief by the city police. Mitrāṇanda, however cures prince Lakṣmipati with the aid of the halahalahāri vidya (lore) from death given to him to revive the dead by the goddess Janguli on the occasion of his marriage. In Act VIII Mitrāṇanda by a magic formula induces the corpse in whom the Käpälika has breathed life and which takes a sword in its hand, to strike that wicked Käpälika, who, however, overcome with fear, disappears. Act X ends happily with husband and wife united in the residence of the Siddha King by the efforts of Maitreya. The various marvellous incidents mentioned above excite the sentiment of wonder (adbhutarasa) in the spectators/audience. According to Bharata, the sentiment of wonder should be introduced in the concluding nirvahana Sandhi, but our poet Ramacandra introduces it in almost each and every Sandhi. Kaumudi and

Page #10

3TF-81984
Mitrāņanda, the hero and heroine of the main plot are somewhat impressive but Sumitrā and Makaranda, the hero and heroine of the by plot are not effectively depicted. Kaumudi and Mitranānda, with rich treasure, flee to Lankā. They go through several ordeals but are ultimately united as husband and wife.
Rāmacandra's Style : Rāmacandra is at his best in sperinkling his dramatic poem with witty and wise sayings-throwing light on the human nature. Excepting some long descriptive stanzas which are rather tough and difficult he may be said to be fond of Vaidarbhi style. His dialogues are, as a rule, lovely, brisk and crisp. His prose is lucid and easy to understand. It must, however, be admitted that a large number of words he, possibly, deliberately uses that are obscure or rarely used. By way of example a few of them are listed in the foor-note. Both of his claims that his play is ‘Kutūhala-sahasra-pradhāna' and 'niśśesarasa-bhāva-pradhāna' are well qualified-with one single exception. He fails to create hāsya-rasa (sentiment of laughter, or humour). It is very likely that Rāmacandra by his very nature and temperament was serious and therefore did not see observe the lighter side of human life. We add at the end a number of his Subhāṣitas and Sudhā-syandi sūktas to give readers an idea of his observations of human nature, especially men, women, robbers, etc.
Modern scholars like Keith, De, Raghavan judge the play by applying modern western, norms and standards and describe it as 'wholly undramatic.'
To judge by Indian standards and criteria, we should first keep in mind, it is unfair and unjust to compare this late playwright of the 12th century with master poets like the unimitable Sudraka or the great Bhavabhūti. His drama does not certainly come up to the normal standard but at the same time does not fall far below the Indian standard. Following Bharata and Abhinavagupta, Rāmaçandra clearly says "Nāfyaprāņāḥ rasāḥ". He has portrayed all the rasas excepting the hasya rasa. But he failed to make either vira or srngara as the dominent (pradhāna, ungi rasa and other rasas supportive to it. Even then we feel that it would be fair to rank Rāmacandra as a second rate poet..

Page #11

37
-80.85
Rāmacandra's Thoughts Rāmacandra sprinkles, now and then, his Kaumudimitrānanda with Subhäșitas. They embody his thoughts about the nature of women, about love, about fate, about men good and bad, and quite a few arthāntaranyasas which are worth remembering; not to be forgotten. A list, not quite exhaustive, of such Subhāṣitas and Sudhā-Syandi Sūktas is added at the end. Here a few of his Subhāṣitas and Sūktas embodying his thougts about the nature of women, about love, about fate and the habit of robbers (cauryavriti) and Suktas are freely translated for the benefit of those who are not acquinted with Sanskrit : 1. The mind of women who for the sake of a man whom they
have seen just for a moment (who fall in love with him at first sight) who desert their own Kingmen who are so very familiar, and who are so friendly and favourable (benefactors),
if at all God Brahmä alone knows. (3.3; p.97) 3.It is this god of love (or Love) itself that effects or brings
about fortunateness (saubhagia - good fortune or luck) and beauty (cangima=soundarya) among lovers. It is the moon, and the moon alone, who produces (make ooze) water in the moon
stones which are hard or compact by nature. (3.9, p. 30) 9. Those women, being blinded by love, consider their lives worthless
- trivial like grass - deserve to be counted first among the heroes - heroic personages. (4.4, p. 49) 12.Even if one falls in the ocean, or thrown down on the earth
from the sky again obtains possession – regains - wealth,
provided he remains alive. (6.1, p. 63) 26. If by an act of kindness you oblige a wicked or cruel person he is bound to do injury by.retatiation. A lion who is ensnared -- Clit. for whom a snare is spread) and is soon to meet his end, kills that very person who tears asunder that share. (10.16, p.125)
Sūktas , 2.Any dress for apparel) suits a person who is naturally handsome (1.18
Second half, p. 12)

Page #12

अनुसंधान-१७.86 Note : this line reminds one of Kalidasa's beautiful arthāntaranyāsa;
। किमिव मधुराणां मण्डनं नाकृतीनाम् । Sakuntala I.20.d 3.For embodied beings nothing is dearer than their own life. (6.5, Ist half) "कौमुदीमित्राणन्द-प्रकरणान्तर्गतानि महाकविरामचन्द्रस्य सुभाषितानि
खणदिट्ठजणनिमित्तं बंधुअणं परिचिअं हिअकरं च । मिल्लंतीणं महिलाण मुणइजइ माणसं बंभो ॥ (क्षणदृष्टजननिमित्तं बन्धुजनं परिचितं हितकरं च । मुञ्चतीनां महिलानां जानाति यदि मानसं ब्रह्मा ।) -३.३, पृ.२७ काणं पि अंगलट्ठी भूसिज्जइ भूसणेहि तरुणीणं । भूसिज्जइ उण काणं पि भूसणं अंगलट्ठीए ॥ (कासामपि अङ्गयष्टिः भूष्यते भूषणैः तरुणीनाम् । भूष्यते पुनः कासामपि भूषणं अङ्गयष्टिना ॥) - ३.६, पृ.२८ एसो सो (पा.भे.अणुराओ)च्चिअ दइएसु घडइ सोहग्ग-चंगिम-गुणाई । चंदो च्चिअ जणइ वाणीसु(?मणीसु) कढिणबंधिसु(?बंधेसु) सलिलाइं ॥ (एष स (पा.भे.अनुराग) एव दयितेषु घटयति सौभाग्य-चंगिमगुणान् ।
चन्द्र एव जनयति मणीषु कठिनबन्धेषु सलिलानि ॥) -३.९, पृ.३० स्नुहोगवार्कदुग्धानां दृश्यं यदपि नान्तरम् ।
तथाप्यास्वादपार्थक्यं जिह्वाऽऽख्याति पटीयसी ॥ -३.१२, पृ.३३ ५. दइएहि चेअ परंमुहेहि मयणग्गिभिभलमणाओ ।
कारिजंते कुलबालिआउ गहिलाई कज्जाई ॥ (दयितैः चैव/एव पराड्मुखैर्मदनाग्निविह्वलमनसः । कार्यन्ते कुलबालिका ग्रथिलानि/ग्रहिलानि कार्याणि ॥) -३.१५, पृ.३७ अल्पत्वं च महत्त्वं च वस्तुनोऽर्थित्वमीक्षते । कव्ये तरक्षुः श्रद्धालुन कव्ये त्रिदशां पतिः ॥ -३.१८, पृ.३७ अस्ताद्रिमाश्रयन्तं प्रदोषसंहतसमस्तवसुसारम् । वोढारं कुलवनितेव मित्रमनुसरति दिनलक्ष्मीः ॥ -३.२२, पृ.२९ खणमित्तदिट्ठपिअयणपिम्मभरुभिभलाओ महिलाओ । चिरपरिचिए वि मिलंति बंधवे एस किर पगिदि । (क्षणमात्रदृष्टप्रियजनप्रेमभरोविह्वला महिला: । चिरपरिचितानपि मुञ्चन्ति बान्धवानेषा किल प्रकृतिः ॥) -४.३. पृ.४२
४.

Page #13

अनुसंधान-१७•87
वीरेषु गणनां पूर्वं परमर्हन्ति योषितः ।
यास्तृणायाभिमन्यन्ते प्राणान् प्रेमान्धचेतसः || -४.४, पृ.४२ भमंति दुहिआओ । तहवि महिलाण पिम्मं दइयम्मि न सयणवग्गमि ॥ (देशं व्रजन्ति विषमं सहन्ते दुःखं ( ? ) भ्राम्यन्ति दुःखिताः । तथापि महिलानां प्रेम दयिते न स्वजनवर्गे ॥ ) - ४.५, पृ.४२ मा विषीद कृतं बाष्पैः फलं मर्षय कर्मणाम् ।
सत्यं विषादशोकाभ्यां न दैवं परिवर्तते ॥ - ४.१७, पृ. ५० १२. समुद्रे पतितस्यापि क्षिप्तस्यापि नभस्तलात् ।
पुनः संपद्यते लक्ष्मीर्यदि प्राणैर्न मुच्यते ॥ -६.१, पृ.६३ १३. अभिमुखवर्तिनि वेधसि पुण्यगुणवर्जितानि सर्वाणि । द्वीपान्तरस्थितान्यपि पुरः धावन्ति वस्तूनि ॥ - ६.४, पृ.६५ संपत्तिर्वा विपत्तिर्वा रोहन्ती दैवमीक्षते ।
१०. देसं वयंसि विसमं सर्हति णिव्वं (?)
११.
१४.
एवमप्यर्थितान्येषु पुंसां क्लैब्याय केवलम् ॥ -६.७, पृ.६७ १५. निष्कांक्षमुपकारोऽपि विश्वोत्तीर्णा सतां क्रिया ।
१६.
अप्रकारास्तु यस्तस्य तत्र ब्रह्मापि मन्थः ॥ - ६.८, पृ.६७ पञ्चषाः सन्ते ते केचिदुपकर्तुं स्फुरन्ति ये ।
ये स्मरन्त्युपकारस्य तैस्तु वन्ध्या वसुन्धरा ॥ - ६.९, पृ.६७ १७. दैवादुपस्थिते मृत्यौ क्षीणसर्वप्रतिक्रिये ।
तथा कथञ्चिन्मर्तव्यं न मर्तव्यं यथा पुनः ॥ ६.१६, पृ.७३ अपत्यजीवितस्यार्थे प्राणानपि जहाति या ।
१८.
त्यजन्ति तामपि कूरा मातरं दारहेतवे ॥ - ७.७, पृ.८३ १९. विसंवदतु वा मा वा शकुनं फलकर्मणि ।
तथापि प्रथमं चेतो वैमनस्यमुपाश्नुते ॥ - ८.४, पृ.९० २०. परस्य शर्मणः सत्यं प्रत्यूहो हरिणीदृशः ।
भवेऽपि तद्यदि क्वापि तदा वा एव हेतवः ॥ - ८.१०, पृ.९४ २१. सरसिजनवनमपबन्धं दिशो वितमसो दृशः प्रकटभावाः ।
अवतरति नभोमित्रे वसुधायां कस्य नानन्दः ॥ - ९.१, पृ.९९ २२. जनुषान्धा न पश्यन्ति भावान् केवलमैहिकान् ।
ऐहिकामुष्मिकान्कामकामलान्धाः पुनर्जनाः ॥ - ९.३, पृ.१०० २३. विरलविपदां कथञ्चिद्विपदो हर्तुं समीहते लोकः ।

Page #14

अनुसंधान-१७. 88
प्रतिपदनवविपदां पुनरुपैति मातापि निर्वेदम् ॥ -९.१०, पृ.१०८ २४. परस्मादुपकारो यः सोऽपि ब्रीडावहः सताम् ।....
तस्याप्रत्युपकारस्तु दुनोत्यन्तः पशूनपि ॥ -१०.२, पृ.११३ सर्वथा कैतवं निन्द्यं प्रवदन्ति विपश्चितः । केवलं न विना तेन दुःसाध्यं वस्तु सिध्यति ॥ -१०.५, पृ.११६ क्रूरः कृतोपकारः प्रत्यपकाराय कल्पते भूयः ।।
विरचितपाशविनाशः प्रणिहन्ति विपाशकं सिंहः ॥ -१०.१६, पृ.१२५ २७. अपकारं कुर्वाणैरुपकारः कोऽपि शक्यते कर्तुम् ।
संताप्य फलसमृद्धाः करोति धान्यौषधीस्तपन: ॥ -१०.१७, पृ.१२५ २८. नक्तं दिनं न शयनं प्रकटा न चर्या, स्वैरं न चान्नजलवस्त्रकलत्रभोगः । शङ्कानुजादपि सुतादपि दारतोऽपि, लोकस्तथापि कुरुते ननु चौर्यवृत्तिम् ॥
-७.३, पृ.७९ २९. ऐहिकामुष्मिकान् क्लेशान्कुक्षिसौहित्यकाम्यया । . स्वीकुर्वनास्ति दुर्मेधाः कोऽन्यस्तस्करतो जनः ॥ -७.४, पृ.७९
सुधास्यन्दि-सूक्तानि १. निजभुजदण्डाभ्यां हि वणिजां द्रविणोपार्जनं मण्डनं न तु खण्डनम् ।-पृ. ९ २. प्रकृतिसुभगे पात्रे वेषो यदेव तदेव वा । - पृ.१२ ३. पुरन्ध्रीणां प्रेमग्रहिलमविचारं खलु मनः । -पृ.४१ ४. सत्यं विषादशोकाभ्यां न दैवं परिवर्तते । -पृ.५० ५. सर्वथाप्यपारव्यसनकान्तारपतितेनापि प्रेक्षापूर्वकारिणा प्राणिना न विषादवैधुर्य
माधेयम् । पृ. ६४ ६. प्राणेभ्यो नापरं वस्तु प्रेमपात्रं वपुष्मताम् । -पृ.६६ ७. उपनता अपि हि विपदः प्रतिरुध्यन्ते देवतादर्शनेन । पृ.९० ८. अवतरति नभोमित्रे वसुधायां कस्य नानन्दः । -पृ.९९ ९. परस्मादुपकारो यः सोऽपि व्रीडावहः सताम् । -पृ.११३ १०. प्रसरति मधौ धात्र्यां जातो न कस्य गुणोदयः । -पृ.११४ ११. क्रूरः कृतोपकारः प्रत्यपकासय कल्पते भूयः । -पृ.१२५

Page #15

On Sthātúś ca rātham in the Rgveda 1.70.7
- M. A. Mehendale RV. 1.70 is a hymn of Parāsára addressed to Agni. It consists of eleven, or according to another mode of counting (adhyayanataḥ), of six stanzas. The seventh (or the fourth) stanza reads as :
várdhān yaṁ pūrvikḥ ksapó vírūpāḥ sthātús ca rátham stápravitam.
The first half of the line offers not much difficulty and can be rendered as “whom (Agni) many nights (and dawns), of different forms, may strengthen.' The diffuculty is presented by the second half. There we have ca after sthātús which apparently looks like the genitive sg. of sthāts-what is stationary' (sthāvara). But, after ca, there is no word in gen. sg. with which it could be coordinated. Scholars, therefore, felt that a mistake had occurred in the transmission of the text and that the text has to be read as sthātús carátham (i.e. carátham to be read as one word, and not two, ca rátham, as in the Pada text). Max Müller? defended this suggestion and Oldenberg (Noten) agreed with him. In support of the suggestion to read carátham occurs (wice in the RV. viz. at 1.58.5 (sthātús carátham bhayate paratriņah) and at 1.68.1 (sthātús carátham aktū'n vyū'rņot'). As regards the form sthātúr, Max Müller observes that it could be the old nom. acc. sg. of neuter noun in -tr. In later Sanskrit, however, we get the form sthāts'. Neither Max Müller nor Oldenberg tells us how they understood the line with the reading sthātús carátham.* In the two RV, passages 1.58.5 and 1.68.1 referred to above, Sāyaṇa interprets the two relevant words as sthāvaram... jangamam ca. In 1.58.5 the word sthātúḥ has to be nom. sg. Sāyaṇa treats it as a form derived from the stem sthātú". But he does not tell us how sthātúḥ

Page #16

TRET-81990 can be acc. sg. in 1.68.1.
Geldner accepts the suggestion of his predecessors to treat carátham as one word, but he interprets sthātúh differently. He takes it as gen. sg. of sthātr-. Hence, in his opinion, the original reading was not carátham, but caráthām (gen. M.). For this emendation of the text he finds support in stanza 3 of this hymn (1.70) where we read gárbhas ca sthātā'm/gárbhas caráthām.? "(Agni) who is the embryo of those that stand still and of those that move", He borrows from this stanza also the word gárbha for the interpretation of the stanza under consideration which he renders as : "Whom they strengthened during many dissimilar nights (and days), (him who is the embryo), conceived at proper time, of all that moves and stands". 10
All western interpreters thus agree in treating carátham as one word. Not only that, Max Müller is quite confident that "there can be no clearer case of curruption in the traditional text of the Rig-veda than, for instance in I, 70, 4 - 7)...".11 I do not share M. Müller's confidence. In my opinion, the author of the Padapātha has correctly interpreted, the Samhita text before him and separated ca rátham as two words. He certainly knew the phrase sthätús carátham which occurs twice before. In spite of that he chose to separate ca rátham since he interpreted rţápravitam as adjective of the word rátham which occurs immediately before it, and not of any other word like gárbha borrowed from a different stanza. On the other hand, he apparently borrowed carátham for the understanding the present stanza. This borrowing is easily understandable as sthātús carátham is a set phrase. The passage is an example of ellipsis, the full text being sthātus (carátham ) ca rátham rtápravitam.
As ragards rtápravitam, Geldner takes it to be an adjective going with the noun gárbha supplied by him! "den zur

Page #17

31ET-89.91 rechten Zeit empfangenen (Keim)”. This is very unlikely. ệtápravit m as an adjective ratham makes good sense. The chariot (in the form of Agni) was set in motion, was impelled, by stá (i.e.by the hymn4 recited by the seer while performing the sacrificial rite). The use of Pravita in the the context of driving a chariot is attested in the Mahābhāsya. Patañjali while commenting on Panini 2.4.56 cites as an example pravito
rathah.15
The line, therefore, may be translated as : "Whom (i.e. Agni) many nights of different forms (and many dawns), as well as what is stationary (and what moves), may strengthen, (Agni who is) the chariot set in motion by the hymn",
Agni is strengthened by the offerings of clarified butter (obtained from cowmilk) and of fire-wood. Hence he is said to be strenghthened by one that moves (cow) and one that is stationary (tree). This is specifically referred to in stanza 9 of the hymn (góşu prásartií váneșu dhişe "you value the cows and the woods"'7).
Foot-notes 1. In the above translation, the words pūrvih ksapó virūpāḥ are created as nom. pl. Oldenherg (Noten) considers the other possibility of treating them as acc. pl. possible. Geldner prefers this other possibility and translates : "Whom they reared during many dissimilar nights (and daybreaks)". 2.SBE Vol. 32 (1891), pp. LXII-LXXIV. According to him, the suggestion was made by Benfey, Bollensen, Roth and others. He does not give references. It is difficult to know whom he refers to by 'and others'. Roth (BR dictionary s.v. carátha) gives reference to Benfey's Sāmaveda Glossar (1948). There Benfey shows his preference to consider carátham, instead of ca rátham, to be the original reading. Roth seems to favour this suggestion. Bollensen (Dic Lieder des Parāscara, ZDMG 22. 1868, p. 596) also considered ca rátham to be an error for the old reading carátham. I am thankful to Prof. H. P. Schmidt for conveying to me the information from Bollensen and to Mrs. Madhavi Koihatkar for supplying to me the information contained in Benfey's Glossar.

Page #18

BIGHETT-869.92
3. Also slightly differcnily at 1.72.6 (sthātr'ñ carátham ca pāhi) and
1.70.2 (gárbhas ca sthātā'm gárbhas caráthām) 4. Though Max Müller translates all the other passages cited by him
in this connection. 5. Alternatively Sāyaṇa looks upon sthatús as abl. sg. of the stem
sthātr'-, cf. yad vā sthātur anantaram caratham bhayaate. 6. Or oven cárathām although this involves change in accent. 7. In 1.70.3 also, Geldner prefers to read cáratām. 8. As noted above, according to Goldner, pūrvih kşapó virūpāḥ are
acc. pl. forms. 9. This translation would be all right for st.3 of the hymn where we
have sthātā'm and caráthām both gen. pl. forms. But in our stanza sthātúh is gen. sg. and not pl. Geluner, in his translation of the present stanza, alos unnecessarily transposes the words sthấtū's carátham "alles dessen, was geht and steht". In stanza 3 he has it right "dessen,
was steht und .... was geht." 10. L. Ranou (Études Védiques at Pāṇinéenees, Vol. 12, pp. 16 and
39) also borrows the word gárbha from st. 3 and, like Geldner, lakes stápravita as adj. of this noun "(Agni, germe) conçu de' Order
sacre. But he considers sthātus carátham as nt. sg. forms. 11. SBE. Vol. 32 (1891) p. LXXII, Max Müller goes on : "But although
I have no doubt that in I, 70, 4 the original poet said sthātúś carátham, I should be loath to suppress the evidence of the mistake and alter the Pada text from ca rátham to carátham. The very mistake is instructive, as showing us the kind of misapprehensin to which the collectors of the Vedic text were liable..." "But, as shown in this paper, the author of the Padapätha has not misapprehended the text before him. Moreover, the author of the Pada lcxt was not one of
"the collectors of the Vedic text". 12. Also in the first half of the line kşapó stands for ksapá usrāh.
The author of this hymn seems to take delight in ellipsis since we have to assume it twice in this stanza as well as in st. 1 (as understood by the author of the Padapātha) cf. Geldner, Translation, f.n. on 1.70.1b).
10 and 11. 13. Lüders (Varuņa sl, pp. 624-625) thinks stápravita qualifies Agni. 14. For this meaning of stá, see Lüders, Varuņa Vol. II, p. 421 ff. 15. Patañjali also cites formis such as pravitā "charioteer' pravetum
'in order to drive from the root vi-'10 drive'. 16. CF. RV 3.115 agnir... tū'rņi ráthaḥ sádá návaḥ Agni the over
new quick chariou." Agni is compared to a chariot in 3.15.5 : rátho

Page #19
35FFF1-9993 na sasnih "victorius like a chariot" 10.176.3 ratho na yor abhi'vrtah "covered like the chariot of a traveller." 17. It seems from the following stanza (8) that the seer is addressing the hymn to the evening fire. (cf., Ait, Br. 8.28, and RV. 10.88.6). Hence, the use of the word ksapah "nights' is stanza 7. In the evening the sun is established in the fire. This is achieved by the evening rites. Since, this has now been achieved, the seer in stanza 8 says that the Hotr has become successful. Hot does not refer to Agni as assumed by Geldner. Since the evening rite was performed to establish the sun in the fire, and since it has been accomplished, the seer concludes the stanza by saying that the Hots has made true all the sacrificial acts (krnvan visvany apamsi satya).