Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

A History of Sanskrit Literature c17: X. Gnomic and Didactic Poetry

A History of Sanskrit Literature c17

Language
English

Contents

X. Gnomic and Didactic Poetry

1. Gnomic Poetry

c17.s1.1

INDIA has always delighted in the expression in verse of pithy observations on life and morals. We find the beginnings of such poetry in the *Ṛgveda*, moral stanzas are preserved incidentally in surprising number in an episode of the *Aitareya Brāhmaṇa*, such verses appear in the Upaniṣads and the Sūtras, while the *Mahābhārata* is only too rich both in gnomai and in didactic matter; philosophy, morals, practical advice for life, and rules of polity in the widest sense of that term, including the conduct of war, are flung at the reader in undigested masses. There is evidence from Patañjali that he knew such a literature, and in the *Dhammapada* of the Pāli canon we have the finest collection of *sententiae* known in India.

c17.s1.2

These maxims were not, of course, popular in the full sense of that term; they are not to be compared to proverbs racy of the soil preserved in their primitive form; they are, as in the maxims of Phokylides in Greece, the turning of the raw material by poets into finished products, and the perfection of their finish varies greatly. Some of them, doubtless, first became current in literature through having been composed or adopted by writers of the fable literature, others merely passed current from mouth to mouth until efforts were made by compilers to collect such popular currency. We need not doubt that the collector became normally an inventor at the same time. We can, indeed, hardly imagine that it would be otherwise; that would assuredly be a more than normally stupid person who could not on the models he had devise a fresh series of maxims, or at least remould the old. We see, in fact, the process at work in the case of the collections¹ which pass under a variety of names such as *Rājanītisamuccaya*, *Cāṇakyanīti*, *Cāṇakyarājanīti*, *Vṛddha-Cāṇakya*, *Laghu-Cāṇakya*, and so on. The number of recensions is extremely large—seventeen have been distinguished and doubtless there are more, for often each manuscript shows distinct variations from any other; the compilers were eclectic, they had many sources open, and it is now quite impossible to determine anything like the original shape of the collection. That it was composed by Cāṇakya, the minister of Candragupta, is absurd; it is perfectly clear that it was passed off under his name because he was famous. We do not even know whether the first stanza in some recensions which promises a treatise on Rājanīti, the conduct of princes, can be taken as indicating that originally the collection dealt with that subject alone. At any rate the number of verses which can be assigned to that topic in extant recensions is negligible, and it seems much more likely that the stanza is the product of the imagination of some one who wished to give the collection a closer appearance of connexion with the minister. The book in its various forms varies enormously; thus one recension has 340 stanzas in seventeen chapters of equal length; another by Bhojarāja, preserved in a manuscript in Çāradā characters, has 576 verses in eight chapters. Its contents deal with general rules for the conduct of life, for intercourse among men, general reflections on richness and poverty, on fate and human effort, on a variety of ethical and religious topics. In the main the stanzas are not connected by any bond of thought, but there are exceptions. Here and there verses are clearly meant to be antithetical. In one passage we find a continuation of the habit, seen in full development in such works as the Pāli *Aṅguttara Nikāya* and the Jain *Sthānāṅga*, to use numerical formulae to fix matters in the memory. Here the wise man is bidden to learn one thing from the lion, one from the heron, four from the cock, five from the crow, six from the dog, and three from the ass. In another group of seven verses the different kinds of Brahmin are expounded, the holy seer, the normal Brahmin, the Vaiçya, who lives by trade or agriculture, the Çūdra who sells *inter alia* meat and drink, the cat who is treacherous, the barbarian who is destructive, and the Caṇḍāla who is a thief and adulterer. There are certain quite common mannerisms in the collection such as the insistence on the use of numbers to give the total of groups sometimes of homogeneous, but also often of quite disparate things, as when one is warned not to abide in a place where there is not a king, a rich man, a learned man, a river, and a doctor. So we have a list of six bad things:

c17.s1.3

¹ O. Kressler, *Stimmen indischer Lebensklugheit* (1907). There are Tibetan (SBA. 1895, p. 275) and Arabic versions (Zachariae, WZKM. xxviii. 182 ff.); for Galanos’ source see Bolling, JAOS. xli. 49 ff.

c17.s1.4

*çuṣkaṁ māṅsaṁ striyo vṛddhā bālārkas taruṇaṁ dadhi* *prabhāte maithunaṁ nidrā sadyaḥ prāṇaharāṇi ṣaṭ.*

c17.s1.5

‘Dry meat, old women, the young sun, milk just soured, dalliance and slumber in the morning, are the six things that take away life.’ A very common device is the repetition of the main word in a series of definitions, as in:

c17.s1.6

*sā bhāryā yā çucir dakṣā sā bhāryā yā pativratā* *sā bhāryā yā patiprītā sā bhāryā satyavādinī.*

c17.s1.7

‘A true wife she who is pure and clever, a true wife she who is faithful to her spouse, a true wife she whom her husband adores, a true wife she who never tells a lie.’

c17.s1.8

*satyena dhāryate pṛthvī satyena tapyate raviḥ* *satyena vāti vāyuç ca sarvaṁ satye pratiṣṭhitam.*

c17.s1.9

‘By truth the earth is supported, by truth the sun gives heat, by truth blows the wind, on truth all is established.’ Even numerical enumerations may have point:

c17.s1.10

*sakṛj jalpanti rājānaḥ sakṛj jalpanti paṇḍitāḥ* *sakṛt kanyā pradīyate trīṇy etāni sakṛt sakṛt.*

c17.s1.11

‘But once do kings give orders, but once speak the wise, but once is given a maiden in marriage; all these three things are done but once.’ The force of example is extolled in one of the few political maxims:

c17.s1.12

*rājñi dharmiṇi dharmiṣṭhāḥ pāpe pāpāḥ same samāḥ* *rājānam anuvartante yathā rājā tathā prajāḥ.*

c17.s1.13

‘When the king walks righteously, most righteous are the people, if he be evil, evil they also, if mediocre, the same with them; as the king, so the people.’ Another maxim emphasizes the advantages of noble character:

c17.s1.14

*etadarthaṁ kulīnānāṁ nṛpāḥ kurvanti saṁgraham* *ādimadhyāvasāneṣu na tyajanti ca te nṛpam.*

c17.s1.15

‘For this reason do kings gather to themselves men of high mind, that neither at the start, the crisis, nor the finish may they play them false.’ A careful structure and a deliberate attempt at rhetorical effect may be seen in the following:

c17.s1.16

*kurājarājyena kutaḥ prajāsukhaṁ: kumitramitreṇa kuto ’sti nirvṛtiḥ*
*kudāradāre ca kuto gṛhe ratiḥ: kuçiṣyam adhyāpayataḥ kuto yaçaḥ?*

c17.s1.17

‘Whence can happiness come to the people through the reign of an evil king? What relaxation is there in friendship with an evil friend? What happiness in the home where the wife is a bad wife? What fame in instructing a bad pupil?’

c17.s1.18

The pedestrian character of the topics is alleviated by the use of metaphors and similes from the life of nature:

c17.s1.19

*ekenāpi suputreṇa vidyāyuktena sādhunā*
*āhlāditaṁ kulaṁ sarvaṁ yathā candreṇa çarvarī.*

c17.s1.20

‘One noble son, good and wise, illuminates the whole of his kin, as the moon the night.’

c17.s1.21

***satsaṅgād bhavati hi sādhutā khalānām: sādhūnāṁ na ca khalasaṁgamāt khalatvam***
***āmodaṁ kusumabhavam mṛd eva dhatte: mṛdgandhaṁ na ca kusumāni dhārayanti.***

c17.s1.22

‘From association with the good fools become noble, but from association with fools noble men remain pure; the earthen vase draws to itself the odour of the flowers therein, but the flowers absorb none of the scent of the vase.’

c17.s1.23

*nātyantasaralair bhāvyaṁ gatvā paçya vanasthalīm*
*chidyante saralās tatra kubjās tiṣṭhanti pādapāḥ.*

c17.s1.24

‘Be not too upright; read the parable of the wood; the erect trees are those that are felled, the crooked are left standing.’ A better moral than this is taught:

c17.s1.25

*varaṁ prāṇaparityāgo na mānaparikhaṇḍanam*
*prāṇatyāgaḥ kṣaṇaṁ caiva mānabhaṅgo dine dine.*

c17.s1.26

‘Better death than dishonour; dying lasts but a moment, dishonour endures for ever.' Fatalism is similarly matched with the exaltation of asceticism:

c17.s1.27

*tādṛçī jāyate buddhir vyavasāyo 'pi tādṛçaḥ*
*sahāyas tādṛça eva yādṛçī bhavitavyatā.*

c17.s1.28

'Man's thought, man's resolve, man's companions, all are such as fate decides.' But:

c17.s1.29

*yad dūraṁ yad durārādhyaṁ yac cādūre vyavasthitam*
*tat sarvaṁ tapasā sādhyaṁ tapo hi duratikramam.*

c17.s1.30

'What is afar, what is hard to attain, what is placed near at hand, all that can be accomplished by asceticism; asceticism is hard to overcome.' Women are unpopular:

c17.s1.31

*anṛtaṁ sāhasaṁ māyā mūrkhatvam atilobhatā*
*açaucatvaṁ nirdayatvaṁ strīṇāṁ doṣāḥ svabhāvajāḥ.*

c17.s1.32

'Untruth, haste, cunning, folly, greed, impurity, pitilessness, these are woman's innate faults.' A parable recommends the advantages of appearances:

c17.s1.33

*nirviṣeṇāpi sarpeṇa kartavyā mahatī phaṇā*
*viṣam astu na vāpy astu khaṭāṭopo bhayaṁkaraḥ.*

c17.s1.34

'If a serpent have no poison yet should he swell out his hood; be poison there or be it not, the expansion of the hood is terrifying.'

c17.s1.35

The Çloka is the prevailing metre, but there occur stanzas in other metres, especially in Bhojarāja's recension which has many in Indravajrā, Vaṁçasthā, Vasantatilaka, and Çārdūlavikrīḍita.

c17.s1.36

Other minor collections of gnomic stanzas are attributed to Vararuci—which of the many is meant is quite unknown, to Ghaṭakarpara, and to Vetāla Bhaṭṭa, under the styles of *Nītiratna*, *Nītisāra*, and *Nītipradīpa*; they contain some excellent stanzas, but their date is quite uncertain. Of far greater importance is the *Nītiçataka* of Bhartṛhari, which has already been noticed. Under the avaricious Çaṅkaravarman (883–902) of Kashmir wrote Bhallaṭa, who suffered severely from the failure of the king to reward poets. His Çataka¹ is carefully elaborated and in varied metres, and it is clear that it is not wholly original; at least one stanza of Ānandavardhana, his earlier contemporary, is included in it.¹ Bhallaṭa wrote also a good deal of other poetry, to judge from citations in the anthologies, which include many well-turned verses. His style is usually fairly simple:

c17.s1.37

¹ Ed. KM. iv. 140 ff. Cf. Kalhaṇa, v. 204.

c17.s1.38

¹ ZDMG. lvi. 405.

c17.s1.39

*antaç chidrāṇi bhūyāṅsi kaṇṭakā bahavo bahiḥ*
*kathaṁ kamalanāthasya mā bhūvan bhaṅgurā guṇāḥ?*

c17.s1.40

‘Many a thorn without, many a space within; ’twere a marvel if the merits of the lotus stem were not frail.’ Another allegory is one of the dust:

c17.s1.41

*ye jātyā laghavaḥ sadaiva gaṇanāṁ yātā na ye kutra cit*
*padbhyām eva vimarditāḥ pratidinam bhūmau nilīnāç ciram*
*utkṣiptāç capalāçayena marutā paçyāntarikṣe sakhe*
*tuṅgānām upari sthitiṁ kṣitibhṛtāṁ kurvanty amī pāṁsavaḥ.*

c17.s1.42

‘The dust, light by nature, is deemed nought, day by day it is trampled beneath our feet and trodden into the ground; but see, dear friend, the fickle wind has tossed it high, and it settles now on the summit of the lofty mountains.’

c17.s1.43

Less original is the work of another Kashmirian poet, a certain Çilhaṇa,² who may also have worked in Bengal. It is clear that he was an admirer of Bhartṛhari; he borrows from him, and when he does not reproduce he alters, partly, no doubt, in order to adapt the standpoint of an earnest Vaiṣṇava to that of a Çaiva like Bhartṛhari; one stanza is borrowed from the *Nāgānanda* of Harṣa. Çilhaṇa is essentially bent on glorifying by his compilation, to which he doubtless added original matter of his own, the merits of asceticism, and there is much in him that is common to all three great religions, Hinduism, Buddhism, and Jainism. It would be difficult to assert that he is a great poet; his matter is more interesting than his manner, which is competent but hardly more than that. His date is uncertain, but before the *Saduktikarṇāmṛta* (1205), in which he is cited. Pischel has not unnaturally seen in him a mistake for Bilhaṇa, and one of Bilhaṇa’s verses is actually found, at least in some manuscripts of the *Çataka*. Nor can the suggestion be positively disproved; it is true that Bilhaṇa is not usually a compiler, but that is not to say that he did not become one in old age: he owned wealth, as the *Vikramāṅkadevacarita* proves, and his eroticism is established by the *Caurasuratapañcāçikā*; but we know from his epic that he grew weary of the world in old age, and that he passes over his erotic poem in silence, so that we might easily believe that he renounced wealth and love and sought the delights of solitude and devotion to God. But in the absence of any old tradition we cannot press Pischel's suggestion.

c17.s1.44

² Ed. K. Schönfeld, Leipzig, 1910. See Keith, JRAS. 1911, pp. 257 ff.

c17.s1.45

The following stanzas illustrate well the minor key of Çilhaṇa's art:

c17.s1.46

*tvām udara sādhu manye çākair api yad asi labdhaparitoṣam* *hatahṛdayaṁ hy adhikādhikavāñchāçatadurbharaṁ na punaḥ.*

c17.s1.47

‘Thee, O belly, I deem wise, since thou art satisfied with mere vegetables; but quite other is my view of the accursed heart which is ever more difficult to satiate because of its hundreds of wishes.’

c17.s1.48

*dadhati tāvad amī viṣayāḥ sukhaṁ: sphuratu yāvad iyaṁ hṛdi mūḍhatā* *manasi tattvavidāṁ tu vivecake: kva viṣayāḥ kva sukhaṁ kva parigrahaḥ?*

c17.s1.49

‘Things of sense delight us here so long only as folly reigns in our hearts; in the mind of those who know the truth objects, delight, and acquisition thereof are nothing.’

c17.s1.50

*vāso valkalam āstaraṁ kisalayāny okas tarūṇāṁ talam* *mūlāni kṣataye kṣudhāṁ girinadītoyaṁ tṛṣṇāçāntaye* *krīḍā mugdhamṛgair vayāṅsi suhṛdo naktaṁ pradīpaḥ çaçī* *svādhīne vibhave tathāpi kṛpaṇā yācanta ity adbhutam.*

c17.s1.51

‘Bark for a garment, twigs for a bed, the foot of a tree for a house, roots to banish hunger, water from mountain streams to quench thirst, sport with the loving gazelles, the birds as friends, the moon as a lamp by night: with such riches at their pleasure, strange that the poor should beg.’

c17.s1.52

Other works are of less interest; Çambhu wrote under Harṣa of Kashmir (1089–1101) an *Anyoktimuktālatāçataka*¹ in 108 elaborate stanzas, of no special merit. His *Rājendrakarṇapūra*,² a eulogy of Harṣa, is cited by Vallabhadeva freely, not his Çataka. The *Dṛṣṭāntaçataka*¹ of Kusumadeva is probably late, though it is cited by Vallabhadeva: it illustrates each maxim by an example, whence its name, and is simple and unpretentious:

c17.s1.53

¹ Ed. KM. ii. 61 ff.

c17.s1.54

² Ed. KM. i. 22 ff.

c17.s1.55

¹ Ed. Haeberlin, 217 ff.

c17.s1.56

*uttamaḥ kleçavikṣobhaṁ kṣamaḥ soḍhuṁ na hītaraḥ*
*maṇir eva mahāçāṇagharṣaṇaṁ na tu mṛtkaṇaḥ.*

c17.s1.57

‘Only the noble can bear the pangs of sorrow; the jewel resists the pressure of the grindstone, not the lime.’

c17.s1.58

*īçvarāḥ piçunāñ chaçvad dviṣantīti kim adbhutam*
*prāyo nidhaya evāhīn dvijihvān dadhatetarām.*

c17.s1.59

‘What wonder if the rich ever hate false men? Treasures ever conceal two-headed snakes.’ The verbal form in the comparative is a frequent feature in this poetry.

c17.s1.60

*dhanam api paradattaṁ duḥkham aucityabhājām*
*bhavati hṛdi tad evānandakārītareṣām*
*Malayajarasabindur bādhate netram antar*
*janayati ca sa evāhlādam anyatra gātre.*

c17.s1.61

‘If given by another even wealth is a sorrow to the noble; it is others whose hearts it delights; the water drops from the Malaya wind trouble the eye, though they give pleasure to the rest of the body.’

c17.s1.62

Still later probably are the *Bhāvaçataka*² of Nāgarāja of the Ṭāka family, or of Bhāva, his protégé, and the *Upadeçaçataka*³ of Gumāni, as well as many other works. In the seventeenth century the great authority on poetics, Jagannātha, wrote his *Bhāminīvilāsa*,⁴ admirable in many respects both as an erotic poem, an elegy, and a store of gnomic sayings, but this poetry is well beyond the limits here set.

c17.s1.63

² Ed. KM. iv. 37.

c17.s1.64

³ Ed. KM. ii. 21 ff.

c17.s1.65

⁴ Ed. Bergaigne, Paris, 1872.

c17.s1.66

The anthologies, which are our sources of so many lyric stanzas, are equally rich in gnomic matter, sometimes of great beauty, and there are a number of brief poems which may best be reckoned as gnomic. The most famous is the *Cātakāṣṭaka*⁵ of uncertain date; the bird will drink only the water of the clouds, and thus is a symbol of *hauteur*:

c17.s1.67

⁵ Ed. Haeberlin, 237 ff.

c17.s1.68

*eka eva khage mānī vane vasati cātakaḥ*
*pipāsito vā mriyate yācate vā purandaram.*

c17.s1.69

‘No peer is there in pride for the Cātaka among the wood-dwellers; athirst he dies or makes supplication to Indra alone.’

c17.s1.70

To an unknown Bhaṭṭa Ūrvīdhara are ascribed some verses full of rough good sense:

c17.s1.71

*anāhutapraviṣṭasya dṛṣṭasya kruddhacakṣuṣā*
*svayam evopaviṣṭasya varaṁ mṛtyur na bhojanam.*

c17.s1.72

‘Better death than feeding an uninvited guest who calmly sits down, though you glare angrily at him.’

c17.s1.73

*ā saptater yasya vivāhapaṅktir: vicchidyate nūnam apaṇḍito ’sau*
*jīvanti tāḥ kartanakuṭṭanābhyāṁ: gobhyaḥ kim ukṣā yavasaṁ dadāti?*

c17.s1.74

‘He is a fool who goes not on marrying until seventy; his wives can live by spinning and pounding; does the bull provide fodder for the cows?’ Very different is the exquisite simile which justifies pity for the worthless:

c17.s1.75

*nirguṇeṣv api sattveṣu dāyāṁ kurvanti sādhavaḥ*
*na hi saṁharate jyotsnāṁ candraç caṇḍālaveçmani.*

c17.s1.76

‘The noble show compassion even to the worthless; the moon doth not withhold her light even from the Caṇḍāla’s abode.’ The immutability of facts is proved in the *Nītiratna*:

c17.s1.77

*maṇir luṭhati pādāgre kacaḥ çirasi dhāryate*
*yathaivāste tathaivāstāṁ kaco kaco maṇir maṇiḥ.*

c17.s1.78

‘A jewel rolls before our feet, glass is placed on the head; let them be as they are, a jewel remains a jewel, and glass glass.’ Royal service is exposed:

c17.s1.79

*rājasevā manuṣyāṇām asidhārāvalehanam*
*pañcānanapariṣvañjo vyālivadanacumbanam.*

c17.s1.80

‘For a man to serve a king is as wise as to lick the edge of a sword, embrace a lion, and kiss the mouth of a serpent.’ The evils of overcrowding are not modern alone, as Vainateya shows in a humorous stanza:

c17.s1.81

*tasminn eva gṛhodare rasavatī tatraiva sā kaṇḍanī*
*tatropaskaraṇāni tatra çiçavas tatraiva vāsaḥ svayam*

c17.s1.82

*sarvaṁ soḍhavato 'pi duḥsthagr̥hiṇaḥ kiṁ brūmahe tāṁ daçām*
*adya çvo janayiṣyamāṇagr̥hiṇī tatraiva yat kunthati.*

c17.s1.83

‘Within the house is the kitchen, there the mortar, there too the crockery, there the children, there his own study. He has put up with all that, but what can we say of the condition of the wretched householder when his wife who to-day or to-morrow will present him with a new addition to his family must spend there her time of labour?’

2. Didactic Poetry

c17.s2.1

There is, of course, no clear line of demarcation between gnomic and didactic verse; the easiest mode of distinction rests on the extent and degree of unity of conception, and that permits of indefinite variety. Of early work of the pronounced didactic type very little has come down to us; Çāntideva's *Bodhicaryāvatāra* is the most distinguished effort known to us to adapt the elegances of Sanskrit poetry to the exposition of a complex philosophical and moral theme. Some of the poems ascribed to Çaṅkara may be reckoned as sufficiently elaborate to be styled didactic tracts, for example, the *Çataçlokī*¹ which in 101 Sragdharā verses sets out with some wealth of imagery the principles of the Vedānta; the *Mohamudgara*,² on the other hand, by the fire of its manner and the elaborate riming it affects is more lyric than didactic; much of it features as the *Dvādaçapañjarikāstotra*. Some poetic merit attaches to the *Çr̥ṅgārajñānanirṇaya*,³ which in a form not common in Sanskrit gives a contest between the claims of love and of knowledge in thirty-two stanzas, the claims of love being espoused by Rambhā, those of philosophy by Çuka. The author and date are alike unknown, but the latter is hardly early.

c17.s2.2

¹ Ed. *Select Works of Srisankaracharya*, pp. 85 ff.

c17.s2.3

² Ed. Haeberlin, 265 ff.

c17.s2.4

³ Ed. J. M. Grandjean, AMG. x. 477 ff.

c17.s2.5

A more interesting and quite definitely datable work is the early treatise on Indian pornography, the *Kuṭṭanīmata*,⁴ advice of a hetaira, of Dāmodaragupta, minister of Jayāpīḍa of Kashmir (779–813). The book shows a young girl how to win gold for herself by the use of all the arts of flattery and feigned love, while preserving throughout a mere desire for wealth. Kalhaṇa mentions him as a poet, and Mammaṭa and Ruyyaka cite verses from him, as do the anthologies, showing that his work won considerable fame. From the point of view of literary history, it has the interest that it depicts a representation of Harṣa's *Ratnāvalī* in an effective and realistic manner. The author's style is simple but not inelegant; it begins:

c17.s2.6

⁴ Ed. KM. iii. 32 ff.; J. J. Meyer, *Altind. Schelmenbücher*, ii (1903).

c17.s2.7

*sa jayati saṁkalpabhavo Ratimukhaçatapatracumbanabhramaraḥ*
*yasyānuraktalalanānayanāntavilokitaṁ vasatiḥ.*

c17.s2.8

‘Victorious is he, the mind-born god, the bee who kisses the hundred petals of Rati's face, whose abode is the glance shot from the corner of the eye of amorous maidens.’ There is both wit and humour, despite their coarseness, in some of his stanzas:

c17.s2.9

*çṛṇu sakhi kautukam ekaṁ grāmyeṇa kukāminā yad adya kṛtam*
*suratasukhamīlitākṣī mṛteti bhītena muktāsmi.*

c17.s2.10

‘Let me tell you, friend, of a singular thing a boorish fellow of a lover did to me to-day; I had closed my eyes in the ecstacy of the moment, when thinking me dead he took fright and let go of me.’

c17.s2.11

*avidagdhaḥ çramakaṭhino durlabhayoṣid yuvā vipraḥ*
*apamṛtyur apakrāntaḥ kāmivyājena me rātrau.*

c17.s2.12

‘Death untimely, in the shape of an uncultivated fellow, rough with his work, who can't easily get women for all his youth, a Brahmin at that, departed from me at night in the guise of a lover.’

c17.s2.13

*paryaṅkaḥ svāstaraṇaḥ patir anukūlo manoharaṁ sadanam*
*nārhati lakṣāṁçam api tvaritakṣaṇacauryasuratasya.*

c17.s2.14

‘A couch with a fair coverlet, a loving spouse, a pleasant seat, all these are not worth a ten-thousandth part of the secret union which takes place in a hurried moment.’ With modern examples before us, it is not surprising to find that Dāmodaragupta has lavished on this work the resources acquired by a prolonged study of the *Kāmasūtra*, the text-books on poetics, and the lexicons.

c17.s2.15

Doubtless inspired in some degree by his predecessor, Kṣemendra, the polymath of Kashmir, wrote his *Samayamātṛkā*,¹ which perhaps means ‘mother by convention’, alluding to the fact that the hetaira-to-be is introduced by a barber as the regular go-between to an ancient expert, Kalāvatī, to be instructed in her exacting profession. The old lady, though owl-faced, crow-necked, and cat-eyed, through the passage of time since she was an expert, proves a witty instructress, and with her skilled aid the young aspirant ends by cheating a young fool and his stupid parent. Another of Kṣemendra’s numerous writings is the *Kalāvilāsa*² which in ten sections discourses of the various occupations and follies of mankind. The hero of the book is the famous Mūladeva,³ the personification of all trickery, who consents to educate in his own trade the young Candragupta whom his father entrusts to his care. We learn from him of the great spirit of cheating, Dambha, which has descended to earth and reigns among ascetics, doctors, lackeys, singers, goldsmiths, merchants, actors, and indeed all others; it has spread even to the world of beasts—witness the crane who parades himself as a penitent to snare the unwary fish, and is known even in the vegetable world—the trees wear bark garments just like ascetics. There is in certain respects a curious modernity in Kṣemendra’s pictures; he knew wandering singers and bards who went about, gipsy-like, with pots and carts, wearing their hair long, rich in children, winning many gifts by flattery and wasting by mid-day what they had received in the morning. More medieval is the complaint made of the goldsmith with his tricks to cheat those who put work in his hands. But we are back to modernity when we find that the doctor, who has quack medicines and who has killed many a patient, is at last voted a great success and cuts a splendid figure; that the astrologer, with all his hocus-pocus and his readiness to predict what his clients wish to hear, does not even know what his wife is doing behind his back; and that the seller of patent remedies, whose head is as bald as a copper kettle, is yet prepared to guarantee an infallible cure for baldness and finds purchasers. The *Darpadalana*,⁴ in seven sections, is intended to show the folly of pride whether it be based on noble birth, wealth, knowledge, beauty, courage, generosity, or asceticism. The form is not uninteresting; each section begins with some gnomic sentences, and then follows a tale in which the leading character delivers himself of a long speech which in effect is a continuation of the maxims. The Buddha appears in this role in ii, Çiva in vii, where he denounces some ascetics as not worth saving, since their passions cling to them still. The *Sevyasevakopadeça*¹ in sixty-one stanzas is a little text of advice regarding servants and their masters, the *Caturvargasaṁgraha* describes the four ends of life, morality, practical life, love, and release, characteristically with more effort in the case of love than in those of the others. The *Cārucāryāçataka*² is a century of verses laying down the rules of good behaviour, illustrating them by references to myths and tales. The work has a certain interest, because it was used by and doubtless influenced the writing of the *Nītimañjarī*³ of Dyā Dviveda (1494), which illustrates some 200 verses of maxims by tales culled from Sāyaṇa’s commentary on the *Ṛgveda*. Probably due to Kṣemendra’s influence is also the *Mugdhopadeça*⁴ of Jalhaṇa, a warning in sixty-six stanzas against the wiles of hetairai.

c17.s2.16

¹ Ed. KM. 10, 1888.

c17.s2.17

² Ed. KM. i. 34 ff. Cf. WZKM. xxviii. 406 ff.

c17.s2.18

³ Bloomfield, PAPS. lii. no. 212; Pavolini, GSAI. ix. 175.

c17.s2.19

⁴ Ed. KM. vi. 66 ff.; trs. ZDMG. lxix. 1 ff.

c17.s2.20

¹ Ed. KM. ii. 79 ff.

c17.s2.21

² Ed. KM. ii. 128 ff.

c17.s2.22

³ Keith, JRAS. 1900, pp. 127 ff., 796 f.

c17.s2.23

⁴ Ed. KM. viii. 125 ff.

c17.s2.24

Kṣemendra can write a fairly simple style, which appears to the best advantage in his reflections on the world and on morals, nor must we for a moment suggest that his remarks on erotics are of the character of pornography; he unquestionably had throughout his work a moral aim, however little we may care for his mode of treating difficult issues. Some of the *Kalāvilāsa* stanzas are quite pretty:

c17.s2.25

*atha pathikavadhūdahanaḥ çanakair udabhūn nṛcākaralokaḥ*
*kumudaprabodhadūto vyasanaguruc̣ cakravākīnām.*

c17.s2.26

‘Then slow uprose the shimmering moon, tormenting the wives of those afar, portending the awakening of the night-lotuses, and causing the female Cakravāka birds the grief of loss of their spouses.’

c17.s2.27

*anāṅgenābalāsaṅgāj jitā yena jagattrayī*
*sa citracaritaḥ kāmaḥ sarvakāmaprado ’stu vaḥ.*

c17.s2.28

'May Love who, though bodiless, with women only to aid him conquered the three worlds, bestow on you, wonder-worker, all that you love.'

c17.s2.29

*artho nāma janānāṁ jīvitam akhilaḥ kriyākalāpaç ca*
*taṁ ca haranty atidhūrtāç chagalagalā gāyanā loke.*
*tamasi varākaç cauro hāhākāreṇa yāti saṁtrastaḥ*
*gāyanacauraḥ kapaṭī hāhā kṛtvā nayati lakṣam.*

c17.s2.30

'Gold is the life and all the business of life for men, yet in this world our singers with their goat-like bleats are clever enough to steal it away; when the wretched thief in the night hears the shout "Oh, Oh," he takes to his heels in panic, but the cunning thief of a singer gets a lakh of coins when his audience shouts "Oh, Oh".' The term *hāhā* expresses joy as well as fright. The denunciation of the goldsmith is quite effective:

c17.s2.31

*Meruḥ sthito 'tidūre manuṣyabhūmiṁ parityajya*
*bhīto bhayena cauryāc caurāṇāṁ hemakārāṇām.*
*tasmān mahīpatīnām asambhave cauradasyūnām*
*ekaḥ suvarṇakāro nigrāhyaḥ sarvathā nityam.*

c17.s2.32

'Why does mount Meru keep so far away from our earth? It is in fear of being stolen by our thieves of goldsmiths. Therefore kings, when robbers and thieves are scarce, should suppress by all means in their power the goldsmith.'

c17.s2.33

Half a century younger than Kṣemendra was Amitagati whose *Subhāṣitaratnasaṁdoha*, 'Collection of Jewels of Happy Sayings,'¹ was written in 994 and his *Dharmaparīkṣā* twenty years later.² The former work in thirty-two chapters, usually written in one and the same metre, touches on the various aspects of Jain ethics, with an obvious polemical attitude towards Brahmanical speculations and practice. As usual, women are assailed readily (vi), and hetairai have a whole chapter to themselves (xxiv). The Āptas, the perfect men of Jainism, are described in xxviii, and the Brahmanical gods are denied the right to rank with them because they lust after women, indulge in drink, and are devoted to the world of sense. The assault on Brahmanism is resumed with much legendary matter to support it in the later work. More important is Hemacandra's *Yogaçāstra*,¹ written in simple Çlokas, with his own commentary in somewhat elaborate prose. The first four chapters contain as developed in the commentary a full and clear account of Jain philosophy, the last eight deal with the various duties and ascetic practices of Jainism. There is, as in Amitagati, the constant glorification of Ahiṅsā and depreciation of women, and, though Hemacandra is capable of some moderately good poetry it would be absurd to give the work any high literary rank. From this point of view greater value attaches to the little but elaborate *Çṛṅgāravairāgyataraṅgiṇī*² in forty-six stanzas, denouncing the love of women, by Somaprabha (1276).

c17.s2.34

¹ Ed. KM. 82; with trans. R. Schmidt and J. Hertel, ZDMG. lix. and lxi; cf. WZKM. xvii. 105 ff.

c17.s2.35

² N. Mironow, *Die Dharmaparīkṣā des Amitagati* (1903).

c17.s2.36

¹ Ed. BI. 1907 ff. ; i-iv, ZDMG. xxviii. 185 ff.

c17.s2.37

² Ed. KM. v. 124 ff.

Linked texts (34)