Indian Antiquary Vol 51

Author(s): Richard Carnac Temple, Devadatta Ramkrishna Bhandarkar
Publisher: Swati Publications

Page 205

OCTOBER, 1922)
MR. BANERJI'S DATE FOR KÂLIDASA
197
40. Argument.-The dignity of Dhåriņi's character proves that Kalidasa lived while she was still remembered. Remark.-Dharini might well have been remembered long after her death, even supposing that Kalidasa had no model in mind in conceiving such a character.
41. Argument.-The present Smytis make out Sakuntala to be a varna-sankara, and Kalidasa goes against the Smytis and makes her marry Dushyanta. He therefore lived before their compilation. Remark.-Kalidasa did not invent the story. He took it from the Mahabharata. Again no Smrti fixes the caste of a Kshatriya father and an apsara. Also, if the Smrtis prohibit Asavarna-vivdha, how is it they mention mixed castes ?
42. Statement.-Kalidasa, like Kautilya, denies a widow's right to inherit. Remark.Is there any proof that such a rule was not still prevalent up to c. 500 A.D. ?
43. Argument.-Style, metre, yamaka, alankára, grammar, double-meanings and apparent contradictions all go to prove the limits of Kalidasa's date. Remark.--Such arguments can never fix definite limite.
44. Statement.-Kálidasa does not mention the Buddhists nor Rådhå. Remark. Buddhism dates from at least c. 520 B.C. and the Gatha (I, 89) speaks of Radhikâ. There is no context in his poems where Rådhå should have been brought in and is not.
45. Argument.--Kalidasa did not know of the Kamasdstra. Remark.--He quotes Sak. IV, 18: Ragh., XIX, 31) Vâtsyâyana of the first century A.D., or later (IV, i, 39-40 : VI, 3, 34).
46. Statement.-Kalidasa influenced Sudraká, Bhatti, Bharthari, Subandhu and Dandin. Remark. He adduces no evidence for the statement, and assuming there is evidence, their known dates are consistent with placing Kálidaea's date as c. 500 A.D., except perhaps as to Sadraka.
47. Argument.-If it is true that Kálidâsa was at Yasodharman's Court, why was Vagula chosen for the text of his inscription? Remark.-The Court poets Kamba and Oftakkûtta did not compose Kulottunga's inscriptions.
48. Statement.-All the Samskrt poets have imitated Kalidasa's ætu-samhdra. Remark.--No evidence of so strong a statement is adduced.
49. Statement.--The Rtu-samhara and the Snydra-tilaka are the principal works of Kalidasa. Remark.-No evidence is adduced in support.
50. Argument.--Vatsabhatti's Mandasor Inscription of 473 A.D. goes to show that Kalidasa lived before that date. Remark.-This raises a number of points of detail to be taken separately."
51. Argument.-Vatsabhatti, like Kalidasa, is fond of subhaga, used prasdda-mala (cf. Fleet, G.I., No. 18, line 7; and Kum. VII, 56), and plays on personal names (cf. Floet, G.I. No. 18, 11, 14, 15, and Ragh., XVIII). Remark.-This argument does not of itself prore anything.
52. Argument.--Vatsabhatti admits that he wrote prayatnena (Fleet, G.I., No. 18, 1. 23). Remark.--Prayatnena, however, can mean "with great care” as well as "with difficulty." It does not indicate any borrowing on Vatsabhatti's part, much less does it prove that he imitated Kalidasa.
53. Argument.--Compare Vatsabhatti's ll. 6, 7, and 17, 18, and 18, 19, with Megh. (Pathak : st. 66) and Rtu. (V, 2, 3, 9). Remark.-Comparison does not support any borrowing by Vatsabhatti from Kálidasa or vice versd. Thus, the only words common to Vatsabhatti's 11. 6,7 and Megh., 66, are citra,abhra, tulya, yatra and tunga : the only ideas common to both