Love or Leave Bhartuharis Dilemma

Author(s): Ashok Aklujkar
Publisher: ZZ_Anusandhan

Page 27

311 HET-89• 27
here. (b) Baile : 1996:208-209 offers a translation that is very similar to Miller's, except for "breasts which remove fascination with the elephant's
bosses." 32. Miller 1967:45 has “Is graced by the Vedas" as the second line.
Like some other translators of Sanskrit texts, she has connected śruta with śruti. However, śruta is quite commonly secular learning. Unless the context indicates a clear association with religious or canonical learning, it need not be translated so restrictively as she has. A translation like 'knowledge, erudition' would have been more appropriate
in the present context. 33. In this stanza, one needs to understand keşāṁcit in the last quarter
as keşāmcid eva 'only of some,' which then implies that only a few lucky ones — only those who have sufficient good karma to their credii – get to enjoy the varied garlands (or perhaps the Spring nights of the described kind); cf. Rāmarsi p. 73: keşāṁcit punyavatām. Dhara-sāra-ganin p. 73: bhāgyavatām pumsām. Thus, Miller (1967:101, 1990:79), whose translation I could not use here, should not have opted for a translation employing the singulars "he" and "anyone".
A precious explanation of the rare word kilakircita is preserved in the commentaries of Dhana-śära-ganin (p. 73 kilakimcitasya suratasabda-višeşasya) and Rāmarsi (p. 73, smita-rudita-muditānăm samkarah kilakimcitam ucyute. kilakimcitasya vilasa-višeşasya).
Miller rightly corrects her 1967 translation, "A lover's bed beside his mistress," to "Beside him his mistress embodying love" in 1990, but while the latter translation can be thought if as agreeing in spirit with the explanations of Dhana-sara and Rāmarsi, it does not have the specificity of those explanations, She also passes over the word karipayaih ("some, a few, select') which is significant as an adjective suggesting insistence on maintaining high standards. Alos, Miller's rendering 'stray' of mugshāh would be difficult to justify, both in terms of what mugdha usually means, as well as the context. One expects the poet to speak of a prominent presence of moonlight, given
his intention to create an enchanting scene 34. I found the blunt contrast in the original muffled in the translations
of Miller (1967:141 - 1990:99) and Cort (1983:41). 35. ll is possible that my use of "never" may be challanged on the
basis of an instance or two in the large corpus of stanzas Kosambi has collected. I have read through the probably authentic 200 stanzas and the possibly authentic 152 stanzas as carefully as I could to