Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

A History of Sanskrit Literature c14.s3: 3. Bilhaṇa

A History of Sanskrit Literature c14.s3

Language
English

Contents

3. Bilhaṇa

c14.s3.1

It is to Kashmir that we must look for the first more serious contribution to history, for Bilhaṇa—the form of name is Kashmirian—was born there, though he left his home perhaps under Kalaça’s reign and wandered far and wide visiting Mathurā, Kanauj, Prayāga, and Kāçī, and staying for a time at the court of a prince Karṇa of Ḍāhala,¹ perhaps also with the Caulukya Karṇadeva Trailokyamalla (1064–94) of Aṇhilvāḍ, before he was received as Vidyāpati, master of the sciences, by Vikramāditya VI, Cālukya king of Kalyāṇa (1076–1127), who bestowed upon him the gifts of a blue parasol and an elephant and chained him to his court. When at Karṇa’s capital, he defeated in a literary competition the poet Gaṅgādhara and appears to have written a poem on Rāma, and he hints that the famous Bhoja of Dhārā² would have been glad to welcome him to his court. At any rate he rewarded his patron by composing in his honour his epic in eighteen cantos, the *Vikramāṅkadevacarita*.³ The date of that work appears to fall before 1088, because it passes in silence the great expedition of the king to the south which took place then, and because it mentions as prince, not king, Harṣadeva of Kashmir who became king only in that year, and we know from Kalhaṇa⁴ that Bilhaṇa actually lived to hear of Harṣadeva’s accession. Of his parentage we know that his immediate ancestors Muktikalaça, Rājakalaça, and Jyeṣṭhakalaça, his father, were Brahmins, students of the Veda, who performed the Vedic Agnihotra (fire-oblation) sacrifice; his mother was Nāgadevī, his brothers were Iṣṭarāma and Ānanda, both scholars and poets, while he himself was taught the Veda, grammar up to the *Mahābhāṣya*, and poetics.

c14.s3.2

¹ Presumably of Cedi, and different from the Karṇa of the *Karṇasundarī* (Konow, *Das indische Drama*, p. 112). The Cedi king was seemingly of long life and many vicissitudes (Duff, *Chronology*, pp. 120, 121, 135).

c14.s3.3

² This suggests that Bhoja was alive later than 1060; so also Kalhaṇa, vii. 259, treats him as alive in 1062.

c14.s3.4

³ Ed. G. Bühler, BSS. 14, 1875. Cf. A. V. V. Ayyar, IA. xlviii. 114 ff., 133 ff.

c14.s3.5

⁴ vii. 936–8.

c14.s3.6.1

The *Vikramāṅkadevacarita* is essentially an application of the normal recipe for making an epic to a historical theme, and it begins, therefore, with the usual application, in this case to Brahman, to create a hero for the safety of the world; the god agreed, and from his waterpot (*culuka*) sprang the founder of the Cālukya dynasty, whose first home in Ayodhyā was abandoned by later kings who extended their conquests to the betel palms of the south, 'where the hooves of their horses wrote the record of their victories on the sands of the ocean shore which witnesses the secrets of the Colas.' This purely imaginary origin for the family is followed by a long break in the tradition, and Bilhaṇa passes to Tailapa (973–97) whose victory over the Rāṣṭrakūṭas is recorded but not his defeat by the king of Mālava. The kings following are, with one exception, mentioned, and then the poet concentrates on Āhavamalla (1040–69), the father of his hero. This victorious king has no son; he and his wife serve humbly in Çiva's temple, and he is promised in reward by the god two sons as the reward of his penance, but one more as a special boon. Three sons are born, Someçvara, Vikramāditya, and Jayasiṅha, the birth of the second being preceded by remarkable portents presaging his future greatness. When the boys grew up, Āhavamalla pressed on Vikramāditya the duty of fulfilling the purpose of Çiva and accepting the heir-apparentship, but the virtuous prince declined to oust his brother.

c14.s3.6.2

He proceeded, however, to win many victories which greatly delighted his father, but in the midst of his rejoicing he was attacked by a malignant fever. Greatly distressed, he decided to end his life, and, his ministers giving reluctant consent, journeyed to the Tuṅgabhadrā, the Ganges of the south, and there perished in the water, setting his heart on Çiva. Vikramāditya was deeply distressed by the news, was with difficulty induced to remain alive, but ultimately returned to the capital where his brother for a time lived peaceably with him. But suspicions arose between the two, and Vikramāditya retired with his brother Jayasiṅha, and took up a position on the Tuṅgabhadrā. He effected then an alliance with the Cola king, but after his ally's death the throne, despite efforts on his part, fell into the hands of Rājiga, who concerted an alliance with Someçvara against Vikramāditya. The result, however, was fatal to the allies; Çiva urged the reluctant Vikramāditya to do battle, and, when he had captured his brother, angrily compelled him to abandon his intention of allowing his brother to resume the royal power. He then made Jayasiṅha viceroy in Vanavāsa and effected more conquests. At this point the poet introduces the usual diversion from serious matters. The king hears of the Svayaṁvara of a Rājput princess, Candaladevī, and wins her as his bride;

c14.s3.6.3

this gives Bilhaṇa the opportunity of describing the effect of the spring on the passions, and the beauties of the maiden in minute detail (viii). The wedding over, the king and his bride disport themselves; he swings her with his own hand, they pluck flowers, bathe together, and a carousal at which the Rājput ladies drink deep follows (ix–xi). The king now returns to Kalyāṇa, but merely to occupy a canto with fresh bathing scenes (xii) and an ode to the breaking of the monsoon (xiii). Jayasiṅha, however, gave trouble; he had to be overcome but pardoned (xiv, xv), and the king then engaged in hunting, slaying lions, hunting boars with dogs, and shooting arrows at deer (xvi). Sons were born to him, and he built a city Vikramapura, and erected a temple to Viṣṇu Kamalāvilāsin. But the Colas, having apparently been defeated rather in the poet’s imagination than in reality, gave more trouble. Vikrama has to defeat them again and occupy for a time Kāñcī. The last canto is refreshingly interesting, for it gives an account of Bilhaṇa’s own family and his life as a wandering Paṇḍit, attesting a practice which prevailed down to the most recent times.

c14.s3.7

It is difficult to say much for Bilhaṇa as a historian. We may justly suspect his impartiality; Çiva intervenes in the affairs of his hero with suspicious promptitude, and the impression conveyed is certainly that the poet is trying by stressing the supernatural intervention in his favour to explain away the awkward fact that he fought with both his brothers. We have no real character-drawing, but merely the reflex of the epic; Āhavamalla and Vikramāditya are as heroes necessarily paragons of virtue, the others vicious. It is quite in keeping with the epic manner that the Colas, so often rooted out, are at the end of the poem still perfectly capable of worrying the ruler. Again, the artificial style leaves often difficulty as to the precise sense; it is not even certain whether while at Karṇa’s court Bilhaṇa wrote a poem on Rāma or made a journey to Ayodhyā. Chronology is utterly lacking, as it is in Bāṇa; ‘after some days’ or ‘after many days’ are expressions quite worthless, and while the inscriptions generally confirm Bilhaṇa’s narrative, there remain much vagueness and inaccuracy, or at least exaggeration as in the case of his alleged Gauḍa conquests. An irritating but epic vagueness prevails; there is dubiety about the identity of the two Karṇas whom he mentions,¹ and he frequently leaves out the names of minor personages, leaving us to guess their identity. The descriptions of the usual pleasures of a royal court are doubtless generically true, but they are clearly out of place, and the Svayaṁvara is too obviously based on Kālidāsa to give us any confidence in its existence, in anything like the form in which it is pictured, though we know that Rājputs long kept up the practice. There is also only too much ground for accepting as true to life the scene of drunkenness, for the Rājputs have long found delight in romping, equivoke, debauchery, and drinking.

c14.s3.8

¹ i. 102 f.; xviii. 93.

c14.s3.9

Bilhaṇa, however, is more satisfactory as a poet. He affects the Vaidarbha style and avoids long compounds; his language is normally simple and clear, and he does not overdo alliterations or plays on words. His masterpiece is admittedly the picture of the death of Āhavamalla in Canto iv; it is a fine piece of simple pathos, and the dignity and courage of the dying king are effectively portrayed. Nor is Bilhaṇa without skill in more elaborate effects, as in his plea for poets:

c14.s3.10

*svecchābhaṅgurabhāgyameghataḍitaḥ çakyā na roddhuṁ çriyaḥ*
*prāṇānāṁ satataṁ prayāṇapaṭahaçraddhā na viçrāmyati*
*trāṇaṁ ye 'tra yaçomaye vapuṣi vaḥ kurvanti kāvyāmṛtais*
*tān ārādhya gurūn vidhatta sukavīn nirgarvam urvīçvarāḥ.*

c14.s3.11

‘Ye lords of earth, prosperity, the lightning of the cloud of fate that moves at its own will, cannot be chained; ever soundeth the drum that doth proclaim the hour of man’s departure; honour, therefore, and take as your guides, laying aside all pride, those skilled poets whose poems provide the drink of immortality to your bodies of fame.’

c14.s3.12

*he rājānas tyajata sukavipremabandhe virodhaṁ*
*çuddhā kīrtiḥ sphurati bhavatāṁ nūnam etatprasādāt*
*tuṣṭair baddhaṁ tad alaghu Raghusvāminaḥ sac caritraṁ*
*kruddhair nītas tribhuvanajayī hāsyamārgaṁ daçāsyaḥ.*

c14.s3.13

‘O kings, cease to obstruct the true poet’s attachment; it is to them that is due the refulgence of your pure fame; by them in gratitude was composed the great, the noble tale of Rāma, by them in anger was Rāvaṇa, conqueror of the universe, made a laughing-stock.’ The advent of winter is depicted quite prettily:

c14.s3.14

*çaratkālātapaklāntakāntavakrenduvallabhaḥ*
*athājagāma hemantaḥ sāmantaḥ smarabhūpateḥ.*

c14.s3.15

‘Then came the winter, feudatory of our Lord, Love, himself beloved by the crescent moon dear to those aweary of autumn’s heat.’ Pretty is the description of Khonamukha, his ancestral home:

c14.s3.16

*brūmas tasya prathamavasater adbhutānāṁ kathānāṁ*
*kiṁ çrīkaṇṭhaçvaçuraçikharikroḍakīlālalāmnaḥ*
*eko bhāgaḥ prakṛtisubhagaṁ kuṅkumaṁ yasya sūte*
*drākṣām anyaḥ sarasasarayūpuṇḍrakacchedapāṇḍum.*

c14.s3.17

‘What shall I sing of that spot, the fountain-head of wonder-tales, that shone as a playful embellishment on the crest of the mountain god, Çiva’s father-in-law? One part bears the saffron in its natural perfection, the other the grape, pale as a slice of juicy sugar-cane from Sarayū’s banks.’ We may suggest that the reference to wonder-tales is an effort to ascribe to his native place the honour of being the source of works like the *Bṛhatkathā*. Āhavamalla’s last words are perfect in their elegant simplicity:

c14.s3.18

*jānāmi karikarṇāntacañcalaṁ hatajīvitam*
*mama nānyatra viçvāsaḥ Pārvatījīviteçvarāt.*
*utsāṅge Tuṅgabhadrāyās tad eṣa Çivacintayā*
*vāñchāmy ahaṁ nirākartuṁ dehagrahaviḍambanām.*

c14.s3.19

‘I know that my life, tremulous as the tip of an elephant’s ear, is gone; no other hope have I save in the lord of Pārvatī’s life. In the bosom of Tuṅgabhadrā I desire to lay aside this deception of human life, my heart set fast on Çiva.’

c14.s3.20

Bilhaṇa’s diction is normally accurate, and for his occasional lapses he can plead precedent. Metrically he is simple; six cantos are of Indravajrā type, three of Vaṅçasthā, two of Çloka¹ and Rathoddhatā; one in Mandākrāntā, one in Puṣpitāgrā, and one in Svāgatā. Çārdūlavikrīḍita and Vasantatilaka are not rare as change metres; Mālinī is occasional, and Aupacchandasika, Pṛthvī, Çikhariṇī, Sragdharā, and Hariṇī are just used, while Vaitālīya dominates Canto xv.

c14.s3.21

¹ He has Vipulās I–III 20, 10, and 7 times respectively, and a weak caesura in Sandhi in Vipulā III in iv. 93 (IS. xvii. 444) in 428 half-stanzas.

Linked texts (6)