4. A Note on Sri-kalidasa-carita-samgraha

Published in the Manjusa, Calcutta, Vol. IV. No.9. May 1950, Sri-kalidasa-carita-samgraha by the celebrated Sanskrit author Sri Y. Mahalinga Sastri is a queer composition. A summary initially of an account of Kalidasa's life, based on tradition and his works in eighteen verses, it is followed by a dialogue between imaginary characters Gautama and Sandilya in which the third one Kaundinya, also joins at a later stage, and all problems relating to the master poet are discussed. The dialogue opens with the reproduction of the eulogies for Kalidasa by an anonymous poet (pura kavinam gananaprasange, etc.) as well as Bana and Dandin. Next is pointed out the fact of his having a critic in Dinnaga but an admire in Nicula, a king of that name, as could be inferred from the supposed oblique references to them in a Meghaduta verse. After that is taken up the question of the propriety of making a non-sentient thing serve as a messenger. Attention is drawn in this connection to Kalidasa's own answer to this, viz. the love-lorn are by their very being incapable of distinguishing between things sentient or otherwise, a view upheld by the wellknown rhetorician Bhamaha. Next is raised the question (it is at this stage that Kaundinya is shown to join) as to why Kalidasa should have stopped at the description of the marriage of Siva and Parvati and not gone upto the description of the birth of Kumara as would suggest the title of the work, the Kumarasambhava. The traditional view that the poet invited the curse on him of Parvati for a little too graphic description of the love-sports of the divine couple which cut short his composition

is discounted with the approval of Anandavardhana. After that is raised the doubt, in view of Kalidasa's acknowledged supremacy in the description of the sentiment of love, about his indifference to or inability in the description of other sentiments like Heroic, Pathetic, etc. which is dispelled by pointing out instances from the Raghuvamsa and the Kumarasambhava where he excels the delineation of the Heroic and the Pathetic. The verse in Canto XIV of the Raghuvamsa in the episode of Sita's exile: tad esa sargah karunardracittaih etc. is taken to represent cleverly the poet's own assessment of his heart-rending description of Pathos. The dialogue takes a different turn here. It must not be Kalidasa who would engage himself in the childish Yamaka word-play in the 9 th canto of the Raghuvamsa and that from that canto onward the work is of some other poet, a view held by some, is taken up for consideration. It is discounted on two counts: one, if it is mere Yamaka, a particular arrangement of syllables, it could well mean inferior poetry, adhama kavya, as says Anandavardhana, but if the same were to be employed occasionally as a diversion by a poetic genius, the case would be different. Second, Kalidasa might have indulged in this to quash the pride of his alleged contemporary, Ghatakarpara whose view it was to carry water in a pot-sherd, ghatakarpara, for one who were to defeat him in the use of Yamaka. Be that as it may, Yamaka, if it is sweet, clear, significant and delightful would add to the beauty of a composition. Simply because it is Yamaka it need not be underrated. Next is repudiated the view that Kalidasa was one of the nine jewels in the Court of Vikramaditya, on the authority of the verses recording their names occurring in the Jyotirvidabharana ascribed to Kalidasa but not actually his and consequently unreliable, more so, because those who find mention in the said verses are not all contemporaries. It is possible that a later poet carrying the pseudonym of Kalidasa would have composed them. There seem to have been many who carried this pseudonym. That one Parimala or Parimalagupta in the court of Munja carried it is well-known, even if Rajasekhara's mention of three Kalidasas may lack naturalness, The Bhojaprabandha CC-0. Prof. Satya Vrat Collection,

A Note on Srikalidasacaritasamgraha 83 story making Kalidasa, Bana, Magha, etc. contemporaries is simply not acceptable for they were not really so. Equally unacceptable is the theory that Kalidasa had friends in the Setubandha-author Kuntala King Pravarasena and the Janakiharana-author Simhalese King Kumaradasa and that they wrote their works with his help. It could only be interpreted to underscore Kalidasa's superiority over the two. Still equally unacceptable is the theory that Vikramaditya, i.e. Candragupta II, got the Setubandha written from Kalidasa in the name of his daughter's son Pravarsena II, and grandson of Vakataka Prthivisena I on the basis of the tradition that he (Kalidasa)uttered a verse at each opportune moment as recorded in the text (of the Setubandha) itself while he acted a messenger between Vikramaditya and the Kuntala king on the ground that he (Kalidasa) is far removed from Vikramaditya and Pravarasena and that there is a marked difference in style in the Setubandha and the Prakrit verses in his works. The theory that Matrgupta described by Kalhana is Kalidasa is simply absurd. More probable it is that he was contemporary of Agnimitra. His Malavikagnimitra describes characters of whom he seems to have had direct experience. The indication of the contemporaneity in the line asasyamitivigamaprabhrti prajanam sampatsyate na khalu goptari nagnimitre ± is diffcult to lose sight of. Further, his contemporaneity with Agnimitra would not conflict with his occupying an honoured place in Vikrama's court, the two kings not being far removed from each other. The title of the play Vikramorvasiya indicates his association with Vikramaditya. So does the sentence anutsekah khalu vikramalankarah where Vikrama could cleverly refer to Vikrama-ditya. The view that the poet had an association with an harlot and spent his time in her company is the imagination of the perverted. How could he, with his heart set on Siva, intent on salvation, be a Vita? 2 The fact of the matter is that when the Buddhists had attacked the Vedic path and the country was troubled by the Mlecchas, the poet and the king (Vikramaditya) once again established the supremacy of the Vedas and the Vedic way of life and restored peace to the country by crushing the foreign invaders. This brings to an end, the lengthy dialogue, the first of its kind in Sanskrit

literature, wherein all the different theories about Kalidasa, old and new, are examined in brief and he is defended against criticism apiece with the approach of any of his devotees. There are few Sanskrit poets and writers in Sanskrit who have become centres of so many theories and view as Kalidasa has. Part of this was due to the near total silence about himself on his part. Any casual reference anywhere, just a name somewhere, was enough to make the scholars come out rushing with their theories. The situation now is that Kalidasa has become a phenomenon rather than remain an individual. Much of the confusion about him is caused by the assumption of his name by a number of later poets and the uncritical approach of the ancients in accepting them all as the first Kalidasa. Our author has a sharp dig at this. After repudiating the view that Kalidasa wrote the Setubandha in the name of Pravarasena, he says through one of his characters, Sandilya: sandilyah sahityasamsare khalvasmatpurvapurusanam na kevala yah kalidasah sa kalidasah, na kevalam ye'rvacinah tadvirudabhajah te kalidasah, parantu ye sarasodarapadyanirmatarah ajnatavisesah te'pi kalidasah, yesamanakalitanamasvarupanam adirasodgarasaurabhyodrikta- vacaste'pi nama kalidasah, ye durgrahacitrakatukavyakartrtaya kramelakaprayarasana vaidagdhyavittakanam abhyarhanaspadam te'pi khalu kalidasah, ye ca vridakaramuktva granthapracararthinah nijanamani- guhana sraddhalavah te'pi bata kalidasah 12 ( sarve hasanti ) | Sandilya : In the world of literature for our ancestors not only that one was Kalidasa who (really) was so nor were later ones so who carried that title, but also those writers of verses full of Rasa about whom nothing particular is known. Such ones whose name and form are not known and whose words are full of the perfume of over-flowing sentiment of Love are also Kalidasas. Those whose tongues are very similar to those of camels because of their creating harsh and pictorial poetry not easy to comprehend are also Kalidasas. And they too are Kalidasas who desirous of propagating their works believe in withholding

A Note on Sri-kalidasa-carita-sangraha 85 their names on the plea that it may be embarassing to them. (All laugh) Though our author gives enough evidence of critical spirit in examining various theories about the master poet, rejecting or accepting them, he seems to fail it in asserting that he (the master poet) would have lived in the reigns of both Agnimitra and Vikramaditya since both of them were not far removed from each other in point of time. As for Agnimitra, there is near certainty about his identity. He was the son of Pusyamitra, the founder of the Sunga dynasty. As for Vikramaditya, there is considerable doubt. If he is identified with Candragupta II, as is the consensus, there should be a big time gap between him and Agnimitra. The dynasty of the Sunga was succeeded by that of the Guptas. The reign of Candragupta II was preceded by a short reign of his brother Ramagupta and a long one of that of his father Samudragupta. There was easily a time gap of some 200 years between the two celebrities and to place Kalidasa in the reign of both would, on the face on it, be rediculous. Here, our author seems more to have been carried away by tradition than reason. Tradition makes Kalidasa one of the nine jewels in Vikrama's court. The name Agnimitra in the Malavikagnimitra indicates his association with the king of that name. In his effort to reconcile the two, our author has landed himself in a different position. He seems to possess a poor sense of history. The word samgraha seems to have been employed by our author in the twin senses of synopsis and compendium. The former would go well with the verse portion and the latter with the subsequent prose portion. The first eighteen verses give, as pointed out earlier, in summary form an account of the life and works of Kalidasa, his grazing the goats in childhood, his cutting the root of the branch of the tree on which he was perching, the royal Pandits' notice of him in that state, their arranging his marriage with a princess who had vowed to marry only a learned man by pointing towards him as their guru, her expulsion of him from the house after realizing her mistake, his going to the Kali temple, her laugh at his words, the slipping of betelnut juice out by $3 Foundation USA

of laughter from her mouth into that of his, his becoming a unique poet, the acceptance of him by the princess, her asking him asti kascid vagvisesah, is there any difference or improvement in his speech, his composing the three Kavyas with each one of the three words as the first ones, his description of the royal duties in the Raghuvamsa, his delineation of the different types of Srngara in his three plays, his honour by king Vikramaditya Sakari, his reestablishment of the authority of the king's routing the Mlecchas. The prose portion, as said earlier gives a compendium of the different theories about Kalidasa. Both portions, therefore, could appropriately be styled Kalidasacaritasamgraha. Since a multiplicity of the theories about Kalidasa, both old and new, had to be examined, it was but natural that there should be a fair sprinking of quotations in the composition. Apart from them the entire work is the compositon of the author himself. One of the most powerful writers of the modern age, he wields a facile pen. Though following for the most part an easy style, he does permit himself a high flown one occasionally, e.g., yamako'pi saralah, sukumarah prasanno madhurah, pustarthah, manoharah, prayuktah atyanarthakatamavahati 'ti aho, prasannavagdevatanuvrttinam kavitallajanam paregiram mahimatisayah | ' pratipaksoktinam anumanaprayatvam svacchanda- bhanguramulavalambanadaurbalyam ca tvarayanupatatam avisrantidauhsthyameva bhuyah paryupasthapayamah | " Our author has a fine sense of humour. He is at his best in satire. An instance of it is the dig, referred to earlier, at the tendency of the ancient Indians accepting all kinds of poets, good, bad or indifferent, as Kalidasa, if only they styled themselves so. The second is the redicule poured on those who ascribe the authorship of certain works to Kalidasa whether the first or the second, or the third and so on. sandilyah - raghuvamsanavamasarge yamakakridayam balisa iva samasaktah kavih kalidaso na bhavatuिmarhatiti kecittadupakramanam sarganam kalidasakrtitve pratyavatisthante, tatra ka bhavatah pratipattih ? kaundinyah - ya pratipattih kavyatrayam prathamena, natakatraya dvitiyena, rtusaharam trtiyena, puspabanavilasasrngaratilakanavaratnamalikadika caturthena, jyotirvidabharanam CC-0. Prof. Satya tavadara putrasena, lambodaratamepraharanah sastena srutabogham ation USA

A Note on Srikalidasacaritasangraha saptena, nalodayamastamena, anyadanyacca navamena dasamena va kalidasena racitamacaksanesu | (ubhau hasatah ) s Sandilya: What have you to say with regard of these who do not accept the cantos of the Raghuvamsa from canto IX onwards to be those of Kalidasa on the plea that the poet who engages himself in the Yamaka-work like a child cannot be Kalidasa. Kaundinya That what I have to say with regard to those who pronounce that the three Kavyas have been written by Kalidasa I; the three plays by Kalidasa II; Rtusamhara by Kalidasa III; Puspabanavilasa, Srngaratilaka, Navaratnamalika, etc. by Kalidasa IV; Jyotirvidabharana by Kalidasa V; Lambodaraprahasana by Kalidasa VI; Srutabodha by Kalidasa VII; Nalodaya by Kalidasa VIII and still others by Kalidasa IX & X. 87 Our author brings to bear on his work profundity of his knowledge of and about Kalidasa and the science of poetics, quoting as he does such authorities as Bhamaha, Dandin and Anandavardhana. Coming from the pen of one of modern India's foremost creative writers of Sanskrit the summary verses and dialogue in the Kalidasacaritasamgraha make a delightful reading and are a valuable addition to the growing modern literature on Kalidasa. REFERENCES 1. p. 278. 2. Since our author appreciates Yamaka if it were to be used properly it is no wonder that he should resort to it in his composition : kavimadhye sarvabhaumah sarvabhaumasabhajitah| ajitah kalidaso'yam daso'yam pratyasau janah || 3. p. 975. 4. p. 278 5. p. 274.