________________
236
THE INDIAN ANTIQUARY
MISCELLANEA.
KALIDASA AND KAMANDAKI.
THE date of Kâlidâsa is yet far from being settled. From the mention of Kalidasa by Bân and in the Aihole inscription of the time of the Chalukya king Pulakesin II. all scholars are now unanimous in asserting that he cannot be later than the 7th century A.D. And most Sanskritists are disposed to place him in the 5th century. In this state of things it behoves everybody interested in the chronology of Sanskrit Literature to bring to the notice of scholars every scrap of information bearing upon the date of prominent authors like Kalidasa.
In the Raghurama (IX) Kâlidâsa speaks of the advantages of hunting, viz., skill in bringing down a moving mark, knowledge of the change of expression due to fear and anger, a fine body due to being inured to fatigue (Parichayam chalalakshya-nipatane bhaya-rushes-cha tad--ingitavedanam | Srama-jayát pragunâm cha karôty-asau tanum-ató S snumatal sachivair-yayau). A similar verse occurs in the Sakuntala (2nd Act), where, in addition to the above, the reduction of fat is specially referred to. (Medas-chheda-kris-ôdarani laghu bhavaty utthina yogyam vapuh sattvánám apilakshyate vikritimach-chittam bhaya-krodhayoh Utkarshal sa cha dhamini yad-ishaval sidhyanti lakshye chale mithya hi vyasanam vadanti mrigayam-idrig vinodal kutahil). Hunting is one of those vices which kings are specially advised to avoid by Manu and other lawgivers. Kalidasa seems to have taken the opposite view.
The Kamandakiya-nitisura, while speaking of hunting, remarks:-"Some point out the following as the advantages of hunting, viz., rising superor to fatigue, exercise, the decrease of indigestion, fat and phlegm and unsurpassed success in archery directed towards fixed and moving marks; but this is not proper; there are generally some very grave (lit. fatal) disadvantages, and, therefore, hunting is a great vice." (JitaSramatvam vyâyama ama-meda-kapha-kshayal chara-sthireshu lakshyeshu bana-siddhir-anuttama Mrigayiyám gunan-etân-ahur-anye na tot kshamam doshal prana-harah prayas-taxmat-tad vyasanan mahat XIV., 25-26). The advantages of hunting selected by the Kamandakiyanitisara are almost the same as those pointed out by
A SECOND NOTE ON VASUDEVA.
To
The Editor, Indian Antiquary. Dear Sir,
I have since read the article "The Divine Vasudeva" by Prof. K. B. Pathak, B.A., pp. 96 ff. of the Journal of the Bombay Branch, R. A. Society, No. LXIV. (1909-10). With reference to the concluding sentence of the above article, stating that the Divine Vâsudeva is different from Kshatriya Vasudeva, my article in the Indian Antiquary, for November 1910, may be read. The Divine Vasudeva is the Eternal Vasudeva of the Holy twelve-syllabled (Dvádasakshara) mantra, called the Para-Vasudeva; and
Kalidasa. It seems, therefore, that Kâmandaki criticises the views of Kalidasa, whose poems must have been in his days on the lips of all, whether young or old. If this idea be acceptable, it will furnish another piece of evidence for arriving at the approximate date of Kalidasa.
shall now mention some data for arriving at the date of the Kámandakiya-ritisúra:
I. Utpala, who wrote his comment upon the Brihat samhita of Varåhamihira in Saka 888 (A. D. 966-67), quotes from Kamandaki; e.g.,
on 77, 1.
[AUGUST, 1911.
II. Vâmana, in his Kávyálakúra-sútravritti, quotes a verse, in which the Kamandaki niti' is referred to (under IV, 1, 2. Kamam Kámandaki nitir-asya rasya divinitam). Vâmana flourished about 800 A. D. (See an article by me in the Journals of the Bombay Asiatic Society for 1909).
Bhavabhuti in his Malatimadhava exhibits the character of a diplomatic lady named Kâmandaki. It appears almost certain that the name was taken from the writer on statecraft whose fame must have been very great in Bhavabhuti's day. Bhavabhuti, we know, flourished about 700 A. Ď.
In the 7th chapter of the Kamandakiya-niti sára, there is a list of kings who fell victims to poison and intrigue (verses 51-54). Varâhamihira in chapter 77 of his Brihatsamhitâ mentions some kings, who are the same as those in the work of Kamandaki (eg., Varshamhira says Sastrena veni-rinigthitena Vidúratham svá mahishi jaghana; compare Kamandaki: Venyam sastram samadhiya tathi chupi Vidúrathamn). I do not dogmatically say that Varáhamihira borrowed from Kâmandaka. Such traditions might have been current in his day. Still I hold that it is not quite impossible that Varâhamihira derives his information from the Kamandakiyanitisúra.
NOTES AND QUERIES.
Apart from Varåhamihira's reference to this intrigue, the Kumandakiya-nitisura must be older than the 7th century A. D. as just shown, and strongly confirms the position that Kâlidása is not later than the 6th century of the Christian
era,
P. V. KANE.
Bombay.
this Para-Vasudeva incarnates as Krishna, who is the Kshatriya Vasudeva.
The passages in the Bhagavadgita: (1) Vasudevas-Sarvam, iti. [VII. 19]. (2) Vrishninám Vasudevo-smi [X. 37]. read together show that the Essential Vâsudeva incarnates as Kshatriya Vasudeva. The two are identical essentially; but when viewed in the Para, Vyúha and Vibhava forms, they may be considered as different.
Thus there is no difficulty presented warranting the speculation about "later interpolations." [p. 103 op. cit., J. R. A. S., Bombay Branch].
A. GOVINDACHARYA SVAMIN, M.R.A.8.
