4. Bhallaṭaśataka in Kuntaka’s treatment

Bhallaṭaśataka is the next śataka cited by Kuntaka. As the name indicates the author of Bhallaṭaśataka is Bhallaṭa. It contains one hundred and eight (108) verses of different metres. Bhallaṭa is a Kashmirian poet and the name of his patron is King Sankaravarman. Sankaravarman ruled Kashmir from 883 to 902. This helps to assign the date of Bhallaṭa as 8^th or 9^th century C.E. This is an allegorical poem i.e anyāpadeśa or anyokti. Through this, the poet gives moral messages and advices to the birds, animals, trees etc. The famous Kashmirian rhetoricians like Abhinavagupta, Kṣemendra, Kuntaka etc. are cited some verses from this anthology. Moreover the anthologies like Saduktikarṇāmṛta and Śārṅgadharapaddhati contain few verses from it. The king was speaking in apabraṃśa and did not know Sanskrit. Sankaravarman was an autocrat and he did not support any poet including Bhallaṭa. They were compelled to find out a way to earn their livelihood. But the uneducated received large amounts from the king. The discrepancies, which were prevalent at that time is indirectly expressed by Bhallaṭa beautifully through this śataka.

Kuntaka cites three verses from Bhallaṭaśataka in the first unmeṣa of Vakroktijīvita. He uses one of the examples to substantiate two different situations. According to Kuntaka, śabda means the exact expression that denotes the intended meaning of a poet even when there are numerous words to express the same thing.

Kuntaka has used one example of Bhallaṭaśataka to substantiate the importance of the word śabda.

kallolavellitadṛṣatparuṣaprahārairatnānyamūni makarākara mā'vamaṃsthāḥ/
kim kaustubhena bhavato vihito na nāma yācñjāprasāritakaraḥ puruṣottamo'pi//^[1]

Here the poet says that,

“O ocean, don’t you slight these gems within you by pelting them with stones dashed down by waves. Did not a single gem, the Kaustubha, turn the Lord himself in to beggar before you with hands outstretched.”

The general quality of an object is not enough to convey some particular feature of that objects. Here the poet starts to explain the qualities of gems in general, then in the second half of the verse he narrows down and pictures the specialty of a single gem kaustubha. If a poet wants to explain the importance of kaustubha gem there is no need to discuss about the general qualities of the gems. In this verse there is no harmony from beginning to end. So Kuntaka boldly points out the lack of beauty of this verse because of its discrepancy. Here Kuntaka reminds that poets should always be conscious about the harmony between the lines.

The yet another verse taken from Bhallaṭaśataka is given below:-

nāmāpyanyatarornimīlitamabhūttattāvadunmīlitam prasthāne skhalataḥ svavartmani vidheranyat gṛhītaḥ karaḥ/
lokaścāyamadṛṣṭadarśnakṛtā dṛgvaiśasāduddhṛto, yuktam kāṣṭika lūnavān yadasi tāmāmrālimākālikīm//^[2]

“O wood cutter, you have done well indeed in cutting down that unseasonal mango bush. It had obscured all, even the names of the other trees. You have given a helping hand as it were to the creator who had stumbled at the outset on his own highway. The world too is saved from an eyesore at seeing something unseen before.”

Kuntaka cites this verse of Bhallaṭaśataka as an example of one of the varieties of vicitra mārga or the brilliant style propounded by Kuntaka. In this variety, Kuntaka says that sometimes the poets adds one or more figures of speech in a single verse without being satisfied by the charm of the particular verse just like adding beautiful pearls on a garland. Here the two figures of speech used by the poet are aprastutapraśaṃsā and vyājastuti.

The definition of these figures of speech in Kuvalayānanda is respectively as follows:-

aprastutapraśaṃsā syād yatra prastudāśayā/^[3]
ukirvyājastudirnindāstudibhyām studinindayoḥ/^[4]

Where a poet describes a non-relevant object keeping the relevant thing in mind is known as aprastutapraśaṃsā. In vyājastuti either praise is expressed by obvious strong criticism or disapproval is expressed by obvious praise. In this verse the poet indirectly expresses the failure of a generous man through the non-relevant mango tree using aprastutapraśaṃsā. Moreover the poet directly praises the falling down of a mango tree or the generous man keeping strong criticism through vyājastuti. The selection of this verse of Kuntaka for this particular situation is highly appreciable.

Yet another verse cites from it is as follows:-

ko'yambhrāntiprakārastava pavana padam lokapādāhatīnām tejasvivrātasevye nabhasi nayasi yat pāṃsurūpūram pratiṣṭām/
yasminnutthāpyamāne jananayanapathopadravastāvadāstām kenopāyena sahyo vapuṣi kaluṣatā doṣa eṣa tvayaiva//^[5]

“O wind, how is this caprice of yours to be explained? You are conferring upon the mass of dust, trodden down by the feet of all and sundry, the highest status of glory in the sky enjoyed only by men of valour! Leave alone the pain caused by it to the eyesight of the onlookers. By what means would you endure the defilement of your own body.”

Kuntaka cites this verse also an example of aprastutapraśaṃsā.

In this verse a generous man engaged in helping the poor people is suggested by the poet in a suggestive way with his poetic genius. The effective creativity of the poet makes even suggestive sense feel as the primary meaning. Because of this reason there is no need to doubt it as a paronomasia or śleṣa, moreover here the primary meaning is not as important as the suggestive meaning.

The text Vakroktijīvita of Krishnamoorthy has shown the reference of this verse as an anthology named Subhāṣitāvalī of Vallabhadeva. But it is notable that the 95^th verse of Bhallaṭaśataka has the same verse. The date of Bhallaṭaśataka (8^th or 9^th century C.E) is much earlier than the Subhāṣitāvalī of Vallabhadeva (15^th century C.E). So doubtlessly this verse can be assigned to the text Bhallaṭaśataka. Krishnamoorthy has pointed out the 60^th and 83^rd verses of Bhallaṭaśataka as cited by Kuntaka and then it is not clear how this verse went unnoticed. Here the emendation is seen only in a single word of the last line ‘kenopāyena sādhyo’ as seen in the Bhallaṭaśataka. Kuntaka amends it as ‘kenopāyena sahyo’. In this verse the word ‘kenopāyena sahyo’ is pertinent because ‘how the wind itself tolerates the dirtiness created by the dust’ is appropriate. Thus in this verse either the change made by Kuntaka or the scribe is really appreciable.

It is notable that for perfection of his of choice examples Kuntaka goes through the small branch of Sanskrit literature like śatakas. It is already said that the verses in them gave lots of beautiful moral messages than any other great poems. So their scope in Sanskrit literature is not negligible. Kuntaka who had made some beautiful modification in the verse of great poets like Kālidāsa also made essential modifications in these śatakas too. It reveals his unbiased approach towards poets and every branch of literature. Every poet and poetry has their own unique features. But only a critic with sharp acumen can find out it. He can only extract the beauty and drawback hidden in it. He should also have the great intellect to depict it as he imbibed. Kuntaka’s approach towards minor branch of literature too is praiseworthy.

Footnotes and references:

[1]:

ibid,p.14.

[2]:

ibid,p.55

[3]:

T.K Ramachandra Aiyar,op.cit,p.96.

[4]:

ibid,p.102.

[5]:

ibid,p.54.