________________
Sanskrit Sahityaśāstra
143
Finally, that Panditarāja Jagannātha also, the author of Rasagangādhara and the last great alamkārika, held an identical view, becomes absolutely clear from his criticism of Jayadeva in respect of Gitagovinda (in which the amours of Rādha and Krsna are described quite frankly).
यत्र हृदयानां रसोदबोधः प्रमाणसिद्धस्तत्रैव साधारणीकरणस्य कल्पनात् । अन्यथा स्वमातृविषयकस्वपितृरतिवर्णनेऽपि सहृदयस्य रसोदबोधापत्तेः । जयदेवादिभिस्तु गीतगोविन्दादि-प्रबन्धेषु सकलसहृदय-संमतोऽयं समयो मदोन्मत्तमतङ्गजैरिव भिन्न इति न तन्निदर्शनेनेदानींतनेन तथा वर्णयितुं सांप्रतम् ।
With due deference to the almost unanimous view of the topmost älankärikas about obscenity one may submit that in appreciating a literary work we should judge it purely as a work of art. As Kālidāsa is himself a great devotee of Lord Siva it is simply unthinkable that he means any disrespect to Siva and Pārvali whom he pays homage in the opening verse of Raghuvamsa in these words:
वागर्थाविव संपृक्तौ वागर्थप्रतिपत्तये ।
जगतः पितरौ वन्दे पार्वती-परमेश्वरौ ।।
“I bow down to Pārvati and Parameśvara (Siva, lit. the Supreme Lord), the world's parents, who like word and meaning are united, that I may attain right knowledge of word and meaning."
Further we may not be wrong in holding that Kālidāsa as a poet felt that it was ‘his duty to suggest rather than to say outright : The love of the Yaksa and Yakşa-patni in Meghadūta is thus a symbol of human love. So too in Kumārasambhava the marriage and the love of Siva and Pārvati serve as prototype for human marriage and human love. Once we accept this suggestion the objection raised by the ālamkärikas loses its force and the vivid description of the amour of the two deities at once becomes a source of great beauty and charm.
Since Kālidāsa is unquestionably a great devotee of Lord Siva, it is unthinkable that any thought of blasphemy or of treating the story of Siva and Pārvati impiously might have ever crossed his mind when describing the amorous sports of Siva and Pārvati. He must have been fully conscious that unless he invests the poem about Siva, Pārvati and the Birth of Kumāra with human emotions and interest it would lose much of iis beauty and appeal to his sensitive readers and that is why he must have drawn the pen-pictures of Menā, Himālaya, Pārvati, Siva, Rati and Kāma after humanizing them by attributing to them human emotions and weaknesses.
Further, this description is neither out of the context, nor opposed to the context, nor added somehow to humour his sensitive readers. The preceding description of the mutual love between Siva and Pārvati (Canto V), of the due consent of Pārvati's parents to their marriage (Canto VI) and of their wedding (Canto VII) naturally and inevitably lead to the Devisambhoga-varṇana'. (Canto VIII). That the wedding should
8. Rasagangādhara, N. S. edition, Bombay, 1939. (p. 64)
