Page images
PDF
EPUB

Bána's Harsha-charita, Kadambari, and Chandi-s'ataka as was remarked near the beginning of this essay, were composed at Kanauj, and when its sceptre was wielded by Harshavardhana. Contemporaneous in publication were the Ratnávalí and the Nágánanda, dramas held in high esteem by the Hindus.

The Ratnávali I was once disposed to adjudge to Báņa; and this adjudication, as against that of the late Professor Wilson, has not, I believe, been contested. But, on closer inspection of materials which are accessible to no one but myself, I have struck upon a consideration partially adverse to what may have been regarded as an irreversible award.*

In the Ratnávali there is a stanza which is read, word for word, in the Harsha-charita as well. It may be translated thus; "Destiny, when favourable, fetches, even from another continent, or even from the midst of the sea, or even from the bounds of space, that which is desired, and instantly brings it to pass." Hindu poets not unfrequently repeat themselves; but downright plagiarism, among them, of one respectable author from another, is unknown. That the verses in discussion are not interpolated, is sufficiently clear from the fact of their being altogether apposite to both the connexions in which they occur. Are they, then, an unacknowledged quotation ?

But, again, the Ratnávali contains a stanza which is embodied, with the change of a single word, in the Nágánanda likewise. In a literal version its meaning is: "Our able poet is the fortunate Harsha. Moreover, this auditory appreciates merit; and the achievements of the Vatsa prince‡ are taking with the people; and we are skilful

On finishing the Naishadhiya, S'ríharsha showed it to his maternal uncle, Mammata Bhaṭṭa, author of the Kávya-prakás'a. The critic, after perusal, expressed a regret, that he had not seen it sooner. In compiling his chapter on blemishes, he had been put to the trouble of travelling through numberless volumes, in search of illustrations. Had he only known of the Naishadhíya in time, he might have drawn on it, he declared, without going further, to exemplify every possible species of defect.

* See the preface to the Vásavadattá, pp. 12-16, foot-note.

In the fifth chapter. And see the Calcutta edition of the Ratnávalí, p. 3. The original words are these:

द्वौपादन्यस्मादपि मध्यादपि जलनिधेर्दिशोऽप्यन्तात् ।

खनीय झटिति घटयति विधिरभिमतमभिमुखीभूतः ।।

This is quoted, as from the Ratnávali, in the Saraswati-kanṭhábharana. Professor Wilson every where errs in assuming Vatsarája to mean "King Vatsa." Udayana is intended. The city of Kaus'ámbí is styled Vatsa-pattanam, "the capital of Vatsa :" and Vatsa denoted a people, and perhaps a region also,

in dramatic representation. Any one particular of these is a source for the attainment of whatsoever aspiration. What, then, can be said, when, owing to my affluent good fortune, this entire category of excellencies is presented in combination ?"* For Vatsarúja we have, in the Nágánanda, Siddharája, a descriptive epithet of the hero of the play, Jímútaváhana.

Now, both the Ratnávalí and the Nágánanda are dedicated to Harsha: for so we are to understand their being attributed to him, as if he were author of them; a custom by no means unprecedented in the annals of Indian literature. The writer of the Ratnávali was a Hindu; that of the Nágánanda,† a Bauddha. The latter may

but not a man. See the preface to the Vásavadattá, p. 4, foot-note; and the Haima-kos'a, IV., 41.

* er fagu: afa: qfcazù¶ guaifeût

लोके हारि च वत्सराजचरितं नाट्ये च दत्ता वयम् ।
वस्त्वेकैकमपौह वाञ्छित फलप्राप्तेः पदं किं पुनर्
मद्भाग्येोपचयादयं समुदितः सर्वे गुणानां गणः ।।

See the printed Ratnávalí, p. 2. My text, for which I have collated several manuscripts, punctually agrees with it, as concerns this extract. The manager is here conciliating the favour of the audience on behalf of the troop of players, himself, &c.

[ocr errors]

Professor Wilson says, respecting his English recension-as it really is-of the Ratnávali, that it may serve to convey some idea, how far the translator may be suspected of widely deviating from his text in the preceding dramas;" where verse is rendered in verse. The passage just given is professedly reproduced, by him, in this strange manner: "S'rí Harsha is an eminent poet; the audience are judges of merit; the story of Vatsa is current in the world; and we, the actors, are experienced in the histrionic art; and I hope, therefore, that, with so precious a poem, and such means of doing it justice, the opportunity afforded me of appearing before so distinguished an assembly will yield me the fruit of all my desires." Select Specimens of the Theatre of the Hindus, second edition, Vol. II., pp. 261 and 265.

It is

It is somewhat singular, that this play should have escaped the questing of Professor Wilson; as it is not very extraordinarily rare, and as it is more than once referred to, and extracted from, in the Das'arúpávaloka. I have, among my private manuscripts, two copies of it, a complete one, and one broken. in five acts, and is of no great length. Its fable is the story of Jímútaváhana, now rendered familiar by the publication of the first volume of the Katha-saritságara.

Of its two benedictory stanzas the first is subjoined :

ध्यानव्याजमुपेत्य चिन्तयसि कामुन्मìल्य चक्षुः क्षणं
TWISAFLTĪJĊ stafxx aarsfq ài cafe i
famı aıafuâısfa faguactan: a àısa: gala
से मारवधूभिरित्यभिहितो बुद्दो जिनः पातु वः ।।

"With eyes unclosed for a moment, on what female art thou ruminating, under pretext of pious contemplation? Behold these persons, ourselves, vexed

have borrowed a couplet from the former; or the former, from the latter: and Bána may have introduced, quotation wise, into his Harsha-charita, from a work not his own, the fatalistic verses of the Ratnávali. However all this may have been, it is scarcely questionable, that the Ratnávali, the Nágánanda, and the Harsha-charita, were produced in the seventh century, and at the court of Harsha of Kanauj; and it will, perhaps, still be proved, that the first and the third were from the pen of one and the same person.

*

"The mere question," observes Dr. Rowland Williams, "whether the court at which Kálidása flourished is that of Vikramáditya, at [in] Málava, 56 B. C., or that of another prince, at Ujjayiní, [?] nearly a thousand years later, shows the uncertainty of most things in Indian literature."+ A Kálidása, and indubitably the greater Kálidása, being noted with eulogy by Bána,‡ it will not answer, any longer, to think of bringing him down to the days of Bhoja of Dhárá. § Indeed, no good cause has as yet been produced for rejecting the Indian tradition, that Kálidása antedated the Christian

era.

One poet more remains, whose connexion with Kanauj may be counted a certainty. I mean Rájas'ekhara, author of the ViddhaSála-bhanjiká, of the Prachanda-pánḍava, or Bála-bhárata, of the Bálarámáyana, and of the Karpúra-manjarí. In all four works, he speaks of his patron as being Mahendrapála, of the city of Mahodaya. Mahendrapála is also called Mahípála ; and his father, Nirbhayanarendra. To the

by the shafts of Ananga. Albeit a guardian in name, thou dost not defend. Hypocritically art thou compassionate. Who is more extremely cruel than thou?' May the Buddha, victorious over his passions, who was thus enviously addressed by the mistresses of Mára, protect you."

Jina is the generic appellation of any Buddha; but here, I think, the word is the subject of a paronomasia.

* S'itikaṇṭha, in his commentary on the Kávya-prakás'a, the Kávya-prakás'anidars'ana, gives Bána, not Dhávaka, as Mammaṭa's name of the poet who was enriched by Harsha. He does not speak of the Ratnávali as being the work which brought gain to the poet; but the omission is supplied by other annotators, such as Vaidyanátha, Jayaráma, and Náges'a. See the Preface to the Vásavadattá, p. 16, foot-note.

+ P. 287 of Christianity and Hinduism. Cambridge: 1856.

See the Preface to the Vásavadattá, pp. 14, 15, foot-note.

§ It is high time to give up speaking of this prince as a great patron of literature. His pretensions to be so considered rest on the frailest foundation possible.

Professor Wilson knew it by a reference only. I have seen a complete copy; the property of Esobá S'ástrin, of Saugor. It is in ten acts.

*

first the poet was preceptor. If Nirbhayanarendra was the title of the Bhoja I. of the Kanauj copper-plate, whose son was Mahendrapála, it cannot be that this Rájas ekhara compiled and supplemented the Bilahari inscription,† which I have assigned, but with much hesitation, to the early part of the twelfth century.

INSCRIPTION REFERRED TO AT P. 5.

व्यम् । खस्ति ।

श्रीमहोदयसमावासितानेकना इत्यश्वरथपत्तिसम्पन्नः† शुद्धाचापरमवैष्णवो महाराज श्रीदेवशक्तिदेवस्तस्य पुत्रस्तत्पादानुरात् ध्यातः श्रीभूयिकादेव्यामुत्पन्नः परममाहेश्वरो महाराजश्रीवत्स

* In the Viddha-sála-bhanjiká, Mahendrapála is called yuvarája; and the terms yáyávara and dauhiki, perhaps "maintainer of a sacrificial hearth" and 66 son of Duhika," are there applied to Rájas'ekhara.

Of Rajasekhara, Professor Wilson has said, with the Prachanda-pándava before him: "He is here described as a poet who occupies that rank in the literature of the day which Válmíki, Vyása, Bhartrihari, and Bhavabhúti, have severally filled. * * * The sútradhára observes, of the assembly, that it is formed of the learned men of the great city of Mahodaya, or the great Udaya; possibly Udayapur, the princes of which city affect to trace their descent from Ráma. The modern city of Udayapur, however, was not founded before the sixteenth century; and the name must be applied to some other place, unless it be no more than a title meaning the very splendid or fortunate. We cannot doubt the long prior existence of the drama, from the mention made of it, or of its author, in the works to which reference is made in the preceding article, and to which we may add the Kávya-prakás'a, a work probably anterior to the foundation of the modern Udayapur. Mahodaya may be the origin of the name of Mahoba, a city of which extensive ruins remain, and of which the history is little known." Select Specimens of the Theatre of the Hindus, second edition, Vol. II., pp. 361, 362.

The Prachanda-pándava is not mentioned in the Kávya-prakás'a: but the Karpúra-snanjarí is. As for Mahodaya, and its identity with Kanauj, the Professor forgot here to look into his own dictionary. Further, he has foisted in Vyása; and he has arbitrarily altered Bhartṛimentha into Bhartrihari :

बभूव वल्मीकभवः पुरा कविस्
ततः प्रपेदे भवि मर्टमेण्ठताम् ।
fwa: qaur wayfaxgur

स वर्तते सम्प्रति राजशेखरः ।।

"Of yore there was a poet sprung from a white-ant-hill (valmika). Subsequently he became Bhartrimentha; and, again, he existed as Bhavabhúti. The same is now Rájasekhara."

For the story of Válmíki's resurrection from a termite-mound, see this Journal, for 1852, pp. 494-498.*

A specimen of Bhartrimentha's poetry is extracted in the S'árngadharapaddhati; with two specimens of Mentha's.

See p. 321 of the preceding volume of this Journal.

‡ The`visarga, as obviously being required, has been supplied. The

has

been inserted by conjecture: but the conjunct in could not but at once suggest it.

राजदेवस्तस्य पुत्रस्तत्पादानुध्यातः श्रीसुन्दरीदेव्यामुत्पन्नः परं भगबतीभक्तो महाराजश्रीनागभटदेवस्तस्य पुत्रस्तत्यादानुध्यातः श्रीमहीसटादेव्यामुत्पन्नः परमादित्यभक्ता महाराजश्रीरामभद्रदेवस्तस्य पुत्रस्वत्पादानुध्यातः श्रीमदप्पादेव्यामुत्पन्नः परं भगवतीभक्तो महाराजश्रीभोजदेवस्तस्य पुत्रस्तत्यादानुध्यातः श्रीचन्द्रभट्टारिकादेव्यामुत्पन्नः परं भगवतीभक्तो महाराजश्रीमहेन्द्रपालदेवस्तस्य पुत्रस्तत्पादानुध्यात: श्रीदेहनागादेव्यामुत्पन्नः परमवैष्णवो महाराज श्रीभोजदेवस्तस्य भ्रा ता * श्रीमहेन्द्रपालदेवपुत्रस्तत्यादानुध्यातः श्रीमही देवीदेव्यामुत्पन्नः परमादित्यभक्तो महाराज श्रीविनायक पालदेवः प्रतिष्ठानभुक्तौ । वाराणसीविघ य सम्बद्ध काशी पार पथक प्रतिबद्ध टिक्कारिकाग्रामे समुपगतान् सर्वानेव यथास्थान नियुक्तान् प्रतिवासिनःश्चेदमाज्ञापयति ।

उपरिलिखितग्रामः सर्वायसमेत व्याचन्द्रार्क क्षितिकालं पूर्वदत्तदेवब्रह्मदेयवर्जितो मया पित्रोः पुण्याभिवृद्धये ९दर्भिस गोत्र || अथर्वसब्रह्मचारिभट्टभुल्लाकाच षष्ट्यां गङ्गायां खात्वा प्रतिग्रहेण प्रतिपादित इति विदित्वा भवद्भिः समनुमन्तव्यं प्रतिवासिभिरप्याज्ञाश्रवणविधेयैभूत्वा सर्वाया यस्य समुपनेया इति ।

श्रीहर्षेण प्रयुक्तस्य शासनस्य स्थिरायतः ।

संवत्सरो * * * फाल्गुनवदि । * निबद्धम् ।

SAUGOR, October 5, 1861.

* Instead of this, the former decipherment has श्रौमहेन्द्रपाल देवस्तस्य पचस्तत्पादान्तख्यातः.

+ Not

-भुक्तान्, as was at first read.

Here I have converted a sibilant into a visarga.

§ Of the gotra of Darbhin mention is frequent. For Dárbhya, see the Indische Studien, Vol. I, pp. 209, 255; and Vol. II., pp. 308, 309 : for Darbhya, Professor Max Müller's History of Ancient Sanskrit Literature, first edition, p. 283 : and, for Darbha, Professor Weber's Catalogue of the Berlin Sanskrit Manuscripts, p. 56, line 7.

|| Here is an error, but of easy correction. There should have been, of course,

दर्भिसगोत्रायाऽथर्व०.

f The original has, by mistake, विधेये ०.

* Amended from संवत्वा. Then follow two unrecognized numerals, denoting a dynastic year, and an indistinct compound character of unknown signifiFurther on, the day of the semi-lunation is expressed by a single numeral. It is the same as the first of the two just spoken of.

cance.

wwwwwwwww

« PreviousContinue »