Metaphors related to Elephants

Metaphors related to the elephants can be divided into three aspects; their body parts, their characteristics and their interaction with the human society. In Śakuntalā the general compares the king to a “giricara”, i.e. a “mountain ranging” elephant. Generally it can be taken as vague decorative epithet, which may imply that he was wandering in the wild or to be precise the mountainous region. However this is a very generic and literal meaning of the term giricara. This term also occurs in the Gaja-śāstra and it refers to a typical variety of elephant. Giricara type of elephant has body parts which are kaṭhina (hard) and rukṣa (dry); he is sahiṣṇu, kleśakṣama and uṣṇapracārābhyucita, i.e. the mountain ranger is sturdy, brave, warlike and in general tall elephant. Thus probably one can assume that Kālidāsa was well aware of the specific terminology of the elephant science and by using this term for the king he wanted to qualify him as sturdy, brave, warlike and tall as this specific form of elephant.

Arthuna inscription of the Paramāra Cāmuṇḍarāja praised him as “giving out constant streams of dāna (largesse or rutting ichor), stout in his long arm (or trunk), uniquely dhvavala (white with fame, or a bull), in his race, bhadra (brilliant, or a high-bred elephant), he was resplendent as the Elephant God (sura dvipa i.e. Airāvata) (v.27).^[1]

In another epigraphic record i.e. the Koni stone inscription of Pṛthvīdeva II of Kalacuri dynasty^[2], year 900 one finds a very interesting reference to a metaphor. The description mentions “mānusyaṃ karikarṇaḥ tāla capalaṃ niḥsakhya (saṃkhya) duḥkhāspadaṃ’ (v.29) states that human life is transitory like the flapping of the elephant’s ears and full of sorrows and that wealth is very unsteady. This is an indirect reference to a masted elephant as the secretion of the fluid is irritating for the elephant and the rutting juice is sweet and files often disturbed such elephants. This is a paradox as such elephants on one hand were considered as a symbol of victory for a ruler and on the other hand the condition itself was miserable for the animal as such. A similar expression is found used by Bilhaṇa in his Vikramāṅkadevacaritam for the Cālukya king Someśvara I, āhavamalla when he decided to adore the ritual of voluntary death at Tungabhadra river in c. 1068 CE. It was his affliction with strong fever, and the resultant unbearable pain which made him realize that the end was imminent, which led him to take decision: Cruel fate suddenly inflammatory fever….. he with a burning sensation unrelieved by the application of sandal-paste….(told his ministers) “I know that poor life is as fickle as the ends of the elephants” ears….so I want to put an end to the misery of corporeal existence with thought fixed on Śiva on the lap of the river Tuṅgabhadrā”.^[3] This is similar to the previously used metaphor kari karṇa tālam equating it to duḥkha.

When Arthaśāstra mentions about the winning over the seducible and non-seducible parties in the enemy’s territory (Book 1, Chapter 14, Verse 7) it elucidates thus–

“Just as an elephant, blinded by intoxication and mounted by an intoxicated driver, whatever it finds (on the way), so this king, not possessed of the eye of science, and (hence) blind, has risen to destroy the citizens and the country people; it is possible to do harm to him by inciting a rival elephant against him; show (your) resentment;”–in this way he should cause the group of the enraged to be instigate.”^[4]

Mentioning the foreign policies Kauṭilya says the king or the conqueror should engage the six procedures of policy with due regard to his power. For instance if he makes himself to war with the stronger enemy it can be presumed as it were in a fight on foot with an elephant (Book 7, Chapter 3, v. 3).^[5] While discussing the difference between brave and a wise son Kauṭilya refers that even in the matter of valour the wise one over-reaches the brave, as the hunter does the elephant (Book 7, Chapter 17, v. 24).^[6]

In Indian thought, beside the rule of the act begetting its sequence in a distant future stands the more easily intelligible, if logically irreconcilable, conception of fate. This idea looms large with Kalhaṇa; he goes on to describe it in this fashion. It is the power that pulls the springs of the puppets of the human stage; it intervenes to bring doubt and discomfiture into the clearest mind. The sun brings out the beauty of the lotus, but fate casts in under the feet of the elephant whose trunk uproots it from its place. On such a view it was impossible to seek a clear intelligence and appreciation of historical events, and Kalhaṇa makes no such effort, his aim is not to understand the course of events or predict the future; it is to inculcate by his great poem the feeling of the vanity of everything save resignation.^[7] There is often very real power and vividness in Kalhaṇa’s descriptions, as in the picture of the flight of Prince Bhoja in 1144 CE to the country of the Dards: The points of icy rock encompassed him like the teeth of death; like net of destruction the dark night of the clouds surrounded him, like herds of elephants snowdrifts flung their weight against him; the spray of the waterfalls smote his body like arrow shots; the skin, that guards the blood, burst open beneath the force of the drifting storms; his eyes were blinded by the glitter of the sun on the snowfields.^[8]

Some references are not direct but oblique ones. One such reference may be pointed out here which is found in the Bower Manuscript (4^th-5^th century CE).^[9] This manuscript is a compilation of medical knowledge extracted from varied scriptures. There is a metaphor used here which describes the relation between an elephant driver and an elephant especially a furious elephant whose driver controls it skilfully with a goad, this situation is used as a metaphor for mūlaka or radish oil which controls the dreadful diseases. It says that “This mūlaka (or radish) oil is much recommended as beneficial to men in paraplegia, paralysis of the thigh, sciatica, and apoplectic convulsions. Barren women also are by it predisposed to conception. It also averts calamities, and removes obstruction and relaxation in the case of scrotal enlargement or displacement of the bladder and the joints respectively.

All these diseases are driven off by drinking the radish-oil, just as a furious elephant, by a skilfully applied goad” (v. 315-318a)–

“prabhinnam=iva māṃtagam=aṅkuśaḥ kuśal-odyata iti” (v.318a).

All the treatises on elephant science describe pākala as a special kind of fever of elephants which is fatal. Bāṇabhaṭṭa the court poet of Harṣvardhaṇa mentions this in his Harṣacarita. According to his description Prabhākaravardhaṇa started his political career as a feudatory chief in Thāneśvar and as time passed away he became supreme lord of Thāneśvar after defeating various kings in north Bengal.

He was designated by Bāṇabhaṭṭa in Harṣacarita as:

“hūṇahariṇakesarī sindhurājajvaro gurjaraprajāgaro gāndhārādhipagandhadvipakūṭapākalo lāṭpāṭavapāṭaccaro mālavalakṣmīlatāparaśuḥ” (Harṣacarita, Part II, p.1)^[10].

So it is clear that Prabhākaravardhaṇa cause the increase in the difficulty level of Gandhāra king (north western India) just like pākala fever creates danger for elephants. It can be presumed that Bāṇabhaṭṭa was well acquainted about elephant diseases.

Similar usage is also seen in the Śaratbari Plates of Ratnapāla (c.920-60 CE), Reganal year 12 (c. 932 CE)

“śaka-krīḍā-śakuni-āṛīḍha-pañjareṇa Gurjjar-ādhirāja-prajvareṇa durddānta-Gauḍendra-kari-kūṭapākalena Keraleśācala-śilājatunā Vāhika-Tāyik-ātaṅka-kāriṇā Dākṣiṇātyakṣauṇīpati-rājayakṣmaṇā”.

Similar to Bāṇa’s description of Prabhākaravardhana in the Harṣacarita here the author mentions it as the description for the king of Gauḍa instead of Gandhāra king.^[11]

Footnotes and references:

[1]:

EI, Vol. XIV, pp. 299, 305.

[2]:

CII, Vol. IV, Pt. II, p. 469.

[3]:

S.C. Banerji & A.K. Gupta. Tr. Bilhaṇa’s Vikramāṅkadeva Caritam, Glimpses of the History of the Cālukyas of Kalyāṇa, Kolkata: Sambodhi Pulications, 1965, pp. 71, 73 (Canto 4, verses 55, 67).

[4]:

R.P.Kangle. tr. The Kauṭilīya Arthaśāstra, Part II, Bombay: University of Bombay, 1963, p. 35.

[5]:

R.P.Kangle. tr. The Kauṭilīya Arthaśāstra, Part II, pp. 378-379.

[6]:

Ibid., p. 435.

[7]:

A. Berriedale Keith. Classical Sanskrit Literature, Calcutta: Association Press & Oxford University Press, 1927 (2^nd edition), p.68.

[8]:

Ibid., pp.68-69.

[9]:

A. Rudolf Hoernle. ed. & tr. The Bower Manuscript, Part II, Calcutta: Archaeological Survey of India, 1893, pp.42, 108.

[10]:

Debarchana Sarkar. Sekele, Kolkata: Sadesh, 2004, pp. 96-97.

[11]:

EI, vol. XL, Part II, 1973, p.63.