The backdrop of the Srikanthacarita and the Mankhakosa

by Dhrubajit Sarma | 2015 | 94,519 words

This page relates “Commentary on the poem [Shrikanthacarita]” as it appears in the case study regarding the Srikanthacarita and the Mankhakosa. The Shrikanthacarita was composed by Mankhaka, sometimes during A.D. 1136-1142. The Mankhakosa or the Anekarthakosa is a kosa text of homonymous words, composed by the same author.

Part 9 - Commentary on the poem [Śrīkaṇṭhacarita]

There is only one commentary available upon the Śrīkaṇṭhacarita of Maṅkhaka, without which it would not be possible for its readers to relish the intrinsic rasa contained in it. Again, the Śrīkaṇṭhacarita is couched up in references of different schools of Indian Philosophy, other branches of knowledge, mythical legends etc., therefore, the readers will not have been able to construe its technical terms as well as difficult words at all, at the absence of any handy commentary. However, to some extent, Jonarāja comes as a relief in dechiphering the meaning lying hidden in the poem. Ofcourse, there may be some previous commentaries prior to Jonarāja, which existence has been hinted by Jonarāja’s crititicism and repudiation of some others’ interpretations.[1]

Rājānaka Jonarāja was a resident of the province of Kashmir, which may be inferred from the very title Rājānaka. He was the progeny of an illustrious family. Nonarāja and Laularāja were respectively his father and grandfather.[2] Apart from the commentary on the Śrīkaṇṭhacarita, Jonarāja had written two commentaries on the Kirātārjunīya and the Pṛthvīrājavijaya also. According to Bühler, Jonarāja wrote the commentary on the Kirātārjunīya on A.D. 1449 and on Pṛthvīrājavijaya of Jayānaka sometimes, between A.D. 1450-1475. He occupies a place, next to Kalhaṇa as a celebrated writer of the continuation of the Rājataraṅgiṇī He has written the second Rājataraṅgiṇī, in the reign of Jainul Ābidīn, the Sultan of Kashmir (A.D. 1420-1470). There is not much information available, regarding the life and works of Jonarāja. He has not added anything about himself in his second Rājataraṅgiṇī However, little bit of information are collected from his own commentaries and from Śrīvara, another Sanskrit scholar of the Sultani age. It is known from Rājataraṅgiṇī (verse 11) itself, that Jonarāja wrote his second Rājataraṅgiṇī, at the command of the chief dharmādhikāra Śrīśiryabhaṭṭa.[3] Jonarāja was also a devotee of Lord Śiva, as he is found to have eulogizing Him, in the first verse of his Rājataraṅgiṇī[4] In the puṣikā of the commentary of the last canto of the Śrīkaṇṭhacarita, Jonarāja has been referred.[5] Generally, the commentary of the commentators on different poems is found to have bearing some title. As for example, Mallinātha’s commentary on the Kirātārjunīya, is named ghaṇtāpatha, sañjīvinī on the Raghuvaṃśa, the Kumāra. and the Meghadūta However, Jonarāja has not assigned any special name to his commentary on the Śrīkaṇṭhacarita. At the very outset of his commentary on the poem, he is seen to have eulogized the goddess of learning.[6] Jonarāja was patronised by Jainollābhadīn. Again, he was the preceptor of Śrīvara.

In his Subhāṣitāvalī, Vallavadeva has quoted some of the stanzas of Jonarāja. Jonarāja’s commentary exhibits some peculiar characteristic features. They are as follows—

While, the style of Mallinātha is characterized by clarity, Jonarāja’s is not so lucid. Though Jonarāja endeavours to explain the text fully, some of his explanations are not precise.[7] Regarding the employment of the chandas and alaṃkāras also, he is not thorough, as he has not referred to all of them. In the commentary, at many places, the texts differ from the text accepted by the editor. As for example, in the commentary, the text divo nirāśrayaḥ is found as to be cirānnirāśrayaḥ in the text of the verse, X. 8. Similarly, divākaraḥ is found in the commentary for prabhākaraḥ in the text of X. 12. Generally, Jonarāja cites a pratīka and afterwards he explains it.[8] Besides, while commenting, he discuses the grammatical terms at the end only, he abstains from discussing it at the middle.[9] It may be mentioned here that in both of the examples, Jonarāja’s technique of commentary is similar to Mallinātha. Lastly, Jonarāja, at the very beginning of his commentary, states unambiguously that he aims at deciphering the literal sense of the poem only, however, sometimes he takes recourse to the secondary sense also, which actually augments the vācyārtha.[10] Jonarāja abides by his statement, which can be proved by a careful analysis of his commentary.

Footnotes and references:

[1]:

As for example, the commentator, while interpreting the term divādisārāṃ, writes “kecittu divādisārāṃ ityekapadaṃ kṛtvā evaṃ vyācakṣate-divādau svargādau sārāmiti/tattu na lākṣaṇikaṃ hṛdayaṃgamaṃ.” Śrīkaṇṭhacarita., XVII. 5, page 239

[2]:

śrīlolarājasutapaṇḍitabhaṭṭanonarājātmajo vivaraṇaṃ vyadhitādyāsarge/
ājñāmavāpya viduṣāṃ kila jonarājaḥ pṛthvīmahendravijayobhidhakāvyarājye/
Sarkar, Aditi, Sanskrit Bhāṣāy Kāśmīrer Itihās, Introduction, footnote, page 31

[3]:

Ibid., page 15

[4]:

Ibid., page 16

[5]:

cf. iti śrīpaṇḍitalolatanayapaṇḍitanonarājatanayarājānakaśrījonarājakṛtayā ṭīkayā…./
Śrīkaṇṭhacarita., XXV. 152, page 363

[6]:

udetī yasyāṃ prakaṭībhavantyāṃ tirohitāyāṃ galatīva viśvaṃ/
ravipravevāstu tamo harantī dṛśaḥ prabodhāya sarasvatī vaḥ// Śrīkaṇṭhacarita., Commentary, page 1

[7]:

yato yatpurastrījanasya dṛśāmavagraho vṛṣṭipratibandhaḥ/
vāṣpābhāva ityarthaḥ/
sa kūṭasthatayā kālavyāpitvena sphurati/
vṛṣṭau hi satyāṃ paṅkaṃ bhavati/
pratyavekṣayā paureṣu nityasukhiteṣu yadbhūjāṃ yaśa eva sphuratītyarthaḥ//

Śrīkaṇṭhacarita., Commentary on III. 18; also Commentary on IV. 62, 63

[8]:

As for example, in the commentary on Śrīkaṇṭhacarita., VIII. 28, it is found that “śravaṇayoḥ karṇayorābharaṇīkṛtaṃ bhūṣaṇatāṃ nītamaśokaṃ kartṛ...../”

Likewise, on VII. 25, “madanaḥ kāmaḥ sa eva dāhakatvāddhūtavaho’gnistatrādhvagotpalākṣījanasya virahiṇīlokasya...../”

[9]:

As for example, in the commentary on VII. 9, “iṣṭakeṣīkāmālānāṃ iti mālāśabdasya hrasvaḥ/
vaṣṭi bhāgurirallopamavāpyorupasargayoḥ ityavaśabdasyākāralopaḥ/” also, in the commentary, on VI. 65, “ahaṃśubhayoryus iti yus/”, Jonarāja has done accordingly.

[10]:

śrīlaularājasutapaṇḍitabhaṭṭanonarājātmajaḥ sahṛdayairvihitābhyanujñaḥ/
kāvye purāricarite kurute’bhiyogaṃ vācyārthamātravivṛtiṃ prati jonarājaḥ// śeṣārthayoriha vihastitabālabodhaśraddhāpratītiraraṇisthahutāśatulyā/
kaṣṭena yasya sucirādupatiṣṭhate’nnaṃ māṅsaspṛhā bhavati tasya hi hāsahetuḥ// lakṣyādinā kvacana saurabhamārabheya tadvācyapoṣakatayetyavaseyameva/
arthavyayaṃ spṛśati parvasu yaddaridrastatkevalaṃ bhavati maṅgalabhaṅgabhīteḥ//

Śrīkaṇṭhacarita., Commentary, page 1

Like what you read? Consider supporting this website: