Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

Studies in the History of Sanskrit Poetics v1.c47: Bhānudatta

Studies in the History of Sanskrit Poetics v1.c47

Language
English

Bhānudatta

v1.c47.1

Bhānudatta¹ is notable for his two popular works on the subject of *nāyaka-nāyikā* and the *rasas*, called the *Rasa-mañjarī* and the *Rasa-taraṅgiṇī*. In the latter work, the author excuses himself² from giving further details about a certain point, because, he says, they are already given in his *Rasa-mañjarī*, which was, therefore, the earlier composition. Besides some verses from Bharata and Rudra's *Śṛṅgāra-tilaka* and a verse from the *Dhvanyāloka*³, Bhānudatta cites a work called the *Rasa-ratna-dīpikā*⁴, which is apparently the same work as quoted by Ratnakaṇṭha in his commentary on Mammaṭa⁵. These citations, however, give us no clue to his exact date.

v1.c47.2

1 The form Bhānukara of this name is given by Śeṣa Cintāmaṇi's *Parimala*, Gopāla's *Vikāsa* and Raṅgaśāyin's *Āmoda* commentaries. The title *miśra* is also appended sometimes to the name.

v1.c47.3

2 *bahavo bhedāś ca rasamañjaryāṃ viśeṣato darśitāḥ, iha punar vistara-bhiyā na pradarśyanta iti*, ed. Granthamālā, p. 35 ; ed. Regnaud, p. 57, l. 32.

v1.c47.4

3 The verse *anaucityād ṭte* in *Dhva*⁰ p. 145 is cited with the remark *tatra prācīna-granthakṛtaḥ*, implying that Bhānu was much younger than Ānandavardhana, in whose *v tti* the verse occurs.

v1.c47.5

4 in *Rasa-taraṅg*⁰ ed. Granthamālā ad i 31, ed. Regnaud, p. 44, l. 32.

v1.c47.6

5 Peterson ii 17. An incomplete MS of a work called by this name is entered in Bhandarkar, *Rep.* 1884-87, no. 533.

v1.c47.7

A lyrical poem, called the *Gīta-gaurīśa* or *Gīta-gaurīpati* in ten cantos, published in the Granthamālā 1887-88, also professes to have been composed by Bhānudatta, who is probably identical with our author¹. As indicated by their respective writings, both the authors are *śaivas*, and both possess poetical pretensions. Our Bhānudatta gives the name of his father as Gaṇeśvara², Gaṇapatinātha³ or Gaṇanātha⁴, while the author of the lyric describes himself as the son of Gaṇapati or Gaṇanātha⁵. There are also a few verses in the two works of our Bhānudatta which also occur in the lyric. Thus the *maṅgala*-verse of the *Rasa mañjarī* (*ātmīyaṃ caraṇam*) = *Gīta-gaurīśa* ii p. 90; *akaroḥ kimu netra* in *Rasa-mañjarī* 51 = *Gīta-gaurīśa* ii p. 14; *prāṇeśasya prabhavati* in *Rasa-taraṅgiṇī* iv p. 40 ed. Granthamālā = *Gīta-gaurīśa* ii p. 77. As the *Gīta-gaurīśa* is not a mere compilation in which we may expect verses from other writers, the presence of verses in it from the two

v1.c47.8

¹ Aufrecht apparently distinguished the two authors at first by separate entries under their name (i 405), but later on (i 793) he states that the author of the lyric "is most likely identical with the writer of the *Rasa-taraṅgiṇī*." (MS described in *IOC* vii pp. 1443-45).

v1.c47.9

² *Rasa-mañj*[^o]. 168.

v1.c47.10

³ *Rasa-taraṅg*[^o] ed Regnaud p. 66, col.; also Weber 824.

v1.c47.11

⁴ in MSS of *Rasa-taraṅg*[^o] noticed in *ALeip* 835, Weber 1726.

v1.c47.12

⁵ *kavi-gaṇanātha-sutasya kaver iti vacanaṃ tri-jagati dhanyam*, ii p. 50; *kṛta-hara-vinayo gaṇapati-tanayo nigadati hita-kāraṇam* ii p. 58.

v1.c47.13

where the name of the author is given as Allarāja, which occurs as Mallarāja in Bühler *Rep.* 1874-75, no. 19, p. 16.

v1.c47.14

works of Bhānudatta can be reasonably explained by a presumption of common authorship of the three works.

v1.c47.15

The *Gīta-gaurīśa* appears to have been modelled on Jayadeva's *Gīta-govinda* which, like Kālidāsa's *Meghadūta*, gave birth to numerous imitations in later times¹. Even a cursory examination of these two works will show the close connexion between them; and it is remarkable that not only the general scheme, but even the verses in some chapters of Bhānudatta's poem correspond in metre with those of Jayadeva's. Thus

v1.c47.16

¹ e.g. the *Gīta-gaṅgādhara* by Kalyāṇa, the *Gīta-girīśa* by Rāma, the *Gīta-digambara* by Vaṃśamaṇi (*HPS* i 18) the *Gīta-rāghava* by Prabhākara, son of Bhūdhara, dated *saṃvat* 1674 (Bhandarkar *Rep.* 1882-83 p. 9). A *Gīta-rāghava* by Hariśaṃkara is mentioned in *HPS* ii no. 53. See also *Rāma-gīta-govinda* (*IOC* vii p. 1480) characterised by Eggeling as "a weak imitation of Jayadeva's *Gīta-govinda*" but attributed to Jayadeva. Eggeling quotes from Garcin de Tassy about such passing off of imitations of *Gīta-govinda* for that of Jayadeva. Cf Pischel, *Die Hofdichter des Lakṣmaṇasena* p. 23.

v1.c47.17

Jayadeva

v1.c47.18

*pralaya-payodhi-jale dhṛtavān asi vedam*
*vihita-vahitra-caritram akhedam*
*keśava dhṛta-mīnaśarīra, jaya jagadīśa hare*

v1.c47.19

and Bhānudatta

v1.c47.20

*bhramsi jagati sakale pratilavam aviśeṣam*
*śamayitum iva jana-khedam aśeṣam*
*purahara kṛta-māruta-veṣa, jaya bhuvanādhipate.*

v1.c47.21

Again, Jayadeva

v1.c47.22

*nibhṛta-nikuñja-gṛhaṃ gatayā niśi rahasi niliyavasantam*

v1.c47.23

*cakita-vilokita-sakala-diśā rati-rabhasa-rasena*
*hasantam*
*sakhi he keśi-mathanam udāram*
*ramaya mayā saha madana-manoratha-bhavitayā*
*savikāram*

v1.c47.24

and Bhānudatta

v1.c47.25

*abhinava-yauvana-bhūṣitayā dara-taralita-locana-*
*tāram*
*kiñcid-udañcita-vihasitayā calal-avirala-pulaka-*
*vikāsam*
*sakhi he śaṅkaram udita-vilāsam*
*saha saṅgamaya mayā natayā rati-kautuka-darśita-*
*hāsam.*

v1.c47.26

These two extracts, taken at random, will show how close the imitation is. We may presume reasonably from this that Bhānudatta's work was written some time after Jayadeva's lyric had achieved sufficient literary reputation to be thus imitated. Whether we place Jayadeva in the first or second half of the 12th century, Bhānudatta cannot be put earlier than that century, and this conclusion gives us one terminus to his date.

v1.c47.27

The other terminus is furnished by the date of one the commentaries on the *Rasa-mañjarī*, called the *Rasamañjarī-vikāsa* (or *vilāsa*) by Gopāla (alias Vopadeva), son of Nṛsiṃha, which is expressly dated in 1428 A.D.¹ In the *Śārṅgadhara-paddhati*, which was compiled about 1363 A.D., several verses are cited under the name of one Bhānu-paṇḍita (790, 973, 1032, 1271, 3328, 3685), none of which, however, can be traced in the known works of our author. Jalhaṇa whose anthology was compiled about the middle of the 13th century, also quotes and ascribes to a Vaidya-bhānu-paṇḍita as many as 18 verses, which are similarly untraceable, but two of which are also to be found under the same citation in the *Paddhati* (973 = 48a and 3328 = 95a). It may, however, be presumed that the author of the *Rasa-mañjarī* was not unknown at this period, and that in the anthologies the epithets *vaidya* and *paṇḍita* were annexed to an earlier or later Bhānu in order to distinguish him from our author, whose namesake he was¹. If this inference is permissible, then we may place Bhānudatta earlier than the middle of the 14th century, but later than the 12th, a closer approximation than which cannot at present be made.

v1.c47.28

¹ Stein, *Jammu Cat.* p. 63, corrected at p. 421, also p. 273. As to the date of this commentary and the era used, see below Bibliography.—Kumārasvāmin, at the beginning of the 15th century, quotes (p. 280) the authority of a work called *Rasa-mañjarī* to show that *viraha-vipralambha* is also termed

v1.c47.29

¹ In the *Sabhyālaṃkaraṇa* of Govindaji (Bhandarkar *Rep.* 1887-91 p. lxiii) we have selections from the poems of Bhānukara and Bhānu-paṇḍita, by which obviously a distinction, such as that apparently made by the compiler of the *Paddhati*, is meant between the two poets.

v1.c47.30

In the last verse of the *Rasa mañjarī*, Bhānudatta's native country is given as Videha (*videhabhūḥ*)² or *praṇaya-māna*. It is not clear whether the reference is to Bhānudatta, for the dictum cannot be traced in his *Rasa-mañjarī*.

v1.c47.31

² In Madras ed. of 1872, as well as in the MS noticed by Aufrecht (*Bod. Cat.* 213b) and Bhandarkar (*Rep.* 1883-84 p. 12), the reading is *vidarbhabhūḥ*, which is a mislection;

v1.c47.32

Mithilā, which agrees with Burnell's description of Bhānudatta as a native of Mithilā. As a Maithilī writer, it is not surprising that he was acquainted with the Gauḍīya Jayadeva's well-known lyric, and tried to emulate it with a similar work on Śiva and Gaurī. In another work called *Kumāra-bhārgavīya*¹ attributed to Bhānudatta, the author is called the son of Gaṇapati or Gaṇanātha (apparently the same as our author), and his pedigree is given thus: Ratneśvara→Sureśvara (author of *Śarīraka-bhāṣya-vārttika*)→Viśvanātha→Ravinātha→Bhavanātha→Mahādeva→Gaṇapati→Bhānudatta. Gaṇapati appears to have been a poet whose verses are quoted by Bhānudatta himself in his *Rasa-taraṅgiṇī*. One poet Gaṇapati is praised, in a verse ascribed to one Rājaśekhara in Jalhaṇa's anthology, as the author of the *Mahāmoda*. An *Alaṃkāra-tilaka* in five chapters and a *Śṛṅgāra-dīpikā* are also attributed appparently to our Bhānudatta.

v1.c47.33

¹ Aufrecht i 405, iii 88. See *IOC* vii p. 1540.

v1.c47.34

The commentaries on the two works of Bhānudatta, as detailed below, are numerous. Of these, the *Naukā* on *Rasa-taraṅgiṇī* by Gaṅgārāma Jaḍi, and the *Vyaṅgyārtha-kaumudī* and *Prakāśa* on *Rasa-mañjarī* by Ananta Paṇḍita and Nāgoji Bhaṭṭa respectively have been published.

v1.c47.35

for the author represents the river Ganges as flowing through his country, which is true of Videha and not of Vidarbha. Cf Weber ii no. 1726. The title *miśra*, often appended to Bhānudatta's name, may indicate that he was a Maithilī Brāhmaṇa, and that he was probably *not* a *vaidya*.

Linked texts (10)