Kaavya rasa in Sanskrit

[KN.Ramesh]

https://books.google.co.in/books?id=hLGgZOzTYzsC&pg=PA69&lpg=PA69&dq=bhavabhuti+%26+kalidas&source=bl&ots=nvMFuHLHAq&sig=T5uNlwAqXagvfqRnDsrO90IPO_U&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj2_8SKpqXSAhWEvI8KHQmkD6gQ6AEISTAL#v=onepage&q=bhavabhuti%20%26%20kalidas&f=false

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/sadaswada/0bw62VLsG4Y/Lk41oKCYXhEJ

BHAVABHUTI & KALIDASA

अविदितगतयामा [रात्रिः]

(avidita-gata-yāmā [rātriḥ])

MEANING:

Literally, "unknowingly-gone-hours [night]" , meaning "[The night] whose course/hours passed unknowingly". Yāma means both 'course' as well as a unit of 3 hours used most commonly when measuring night times (for example a synonym for night is triyāma, 'the one with lasting 3 yāmas')

 

CONTEXT:

This phrase is from Bhavabhūti's play Uttararāmacaritam, first act verse 27. It's often said that there is no greater delight than the Uttararāmacaritam for a mind with a taste for pathos (karuṇā). The content of the play derives from the Rāmāyaṇa and involves events after the war with Rāvaṇa. Rāma makes the harsh decision of abandoning a pregnant Sītā in response to slander against her character, and the story continues with the birth and ascent of his sons Lava and Kuśa. 

Bhavabhūti is often placed beside Kālidāsa in lists of Sanskrit's greatest playwrights; in fact, there is an entire genre of writing that involves fictional stories of these two poets sparring with each other. Bhavabhūti is depicted as an learned, passionate, highly emotional poet who nevertheless is just a shade lesser than the balanced, effortlessly brilliant Kālidāsa whose simplicity is beyond genius. The modern historical view is that they were not contemporaries at all, but that is a minor nitpick compared to the poetic and entertainment value of these imagined contests :-)

The Uttararāmacaritam begins with Rāma having his daily meetings with Sītā by his side. Several attendants come in with news and personal messages from well-wishers and this sets the scene. In classic fashion, there are several forebodings of what is to come, but of course the characters are unaware of that. Lakṣmaṇa then enters, and escorts the couple to a newly completed picture gallery which has portraits of events from Rāma's life. The trio chat heartily as they move from picture to picture, from Rāma's birth, Viśvāmitra's arrival, Rāma winning Sītā and his victorious arrival into the city, etc. The poet cleverly uses this to sketch Rāma's dignity and appropriateness for which this play is famous; for example, when the trio comes to a picture of Kaikeyi, Rāma makes up an quick excuse and moves on. Rāma and Sītā's mutual love is also brought out beautifully. 

The trio then come to a picture of the Prasravaṇa mountain in the Janasthāna forest. This is last time the couple was happy together in the forest. Rāma reminisces about those wonderful nights, and asks Sītā if she remembers the time when:

किमपि किमपि मन्दं मन्दमासक्तियोगात्

अविरलितकपोलं जल्पतोरक्रमेण |

अशिथिलपरिरम्भव्यापृतैकैकदोष्णो:

अविदितगतयामा रात्रिरेव व्यरंसीत् ||

kimapi kimapi mandaṃ mandam āsaktiyogāt

aviralita-kapolaṃ jalpator-akrameṇa |

aśithila-parirambha-vyāpṛt-aikaika-doṣṇoḥ

avidita-gata-yāmā rātrireva vyaraṃsīt ||

(mālinī metre, 15 syllables per line) 

"We were sitting close together, our cheeks touching and arms in a tight embrace, chatting aimlessly about all kinds of things -- the night itself went by before we knew it!"

This is probably the most famous verse of the work because of a cute story: In one of the fictional Bhavabhūti vs Kālidāsa tales, it's said that Bhavabhūti had originally written the 4th line as "avidita-gata-yāmā rātrirevaṃ vyaraṃsīt" - it's still in the same metre, but means "the night thus passed unknowingly". He goes to Kālidāsa to get his play reviewed. Kālidāsa is (as can be expected) in a state of general bliss, calmly chewing his betel leaf after his meal. He reads the play, smiles at Bhavabhūti and hands him a betel leaf with a big circle of slaked lime in its middle. He tells him, "Don't you think that's a little too much lime?"

Bhavabhūti goes home, and tries to decipher this. "Too much lime? Maybe he means I'm overpowering the mood somewhere. But where? Why would he give me a betel leaf? Well typically a betel leaf is chewed after a hearty meal, in a calm, serene, happy setting. The only such moods in my work are at the happy ending and the happy beginning. Happy endings are fine -- let me check my beginning again". Lo and behold! He finds this verse, and sees that removing the anusvāra (the circle) would make the line go from the bald journalistic tone of "the night thus passed unknowingly" to the beautifully poetic "the night itself passed unknowingly" :-)

This is a major turning point in the play. That event was the last time the couple were together in the forest, and is now the last time they are together in their adulthood. What happens next? Read the Uttararāmacaritam to find out, and to develop a most vile distaste for public opinion! 

A THOUGHT FOR TODAY:

ये नाम केचिदिह नः प्रथयन्त्यवज्ञां

जानन्ति ते किमपि तान्प्रति नैष यत्नः |

उत्पत्स्यते तु मम कोऽपि समानधर्मा 

कालो ह्ययं निरवधिर्विपुला च पृथ्वी॥ 

ye nāma kecidiha naḥ prathayantyavajñāṃ

jānanti te kimapi tānprati naiṣa yatnaḥ |

utpatsyate tu mama ko'pi samānadharmā 

kālo hyayaṃ niravadhirvipulā ca pṛthvī || 

Poor Bhavabhūti appears not unfamiliar to getting a bad rap in his own time, a state that has plagued his image for centuries now. In his play Mālatīmādhava, he makes a point that deserves to be the leading light of anyone wishing to do something of value and is put off by discouragement. Besides the words of Gandhi ("First they laugh at you,...") and Teddy Roosevelt ("It is not the critic who counts..."), Bhavabhūti's confidence in the future stands resplendent: 

"They who disparage my work should know that it's not for them that I did it. One day, there will arise someone who will truly know me: this world is vast, and time infinite."

"Samāna-dharmā" ('equal spirit') could very well have been today's phrase! 

[KN.Ramesh]

https://ia801501.us.archive.org/24/items/rasaniShyandinii/rasaniShyandinii_ed.pdf

100 vyaakhyaanas / explanations to a single sloka in Baalakanda of Ramayana by Paruthiyoor Periyavaa.

 

The sloka taken for explanation is aham vedmi mahaatmaanam saadhu satya paraakrama:  ...

[KN.Ramesh]

Rama, Surpanakha & Lakshmana in the words of Valmiki                                                   - By Thethiyur Periyavaa The beauty of interpretation of  Itihas and Puranas These days we are all flooded with information/write-ups/articles etc on different view points of Ramayana/ Mahabharata/Puranas/Chanakya Niti or anything connected with ancient culture/ sanskrit by any tom, dick and harry. Of all these, the gentleman Devdutt Patnaik, excels in the art of gibberish articles on Itihasas. One wonders whether he has adequate knowledge of sanskrit, going by the articles that he writes on Ramayana and Mahabharata and  his inappropriate  and incorrect interpretations of the ancient scriptures.  Unfortunately, his books are the best sellers (there are others who are also in the race like Amish Tripati, Anand Neelakantan etc.). While there should be sufficient space in literary world for different view points on all literature( of course, this is restricted only to Hindu scriptures and literature and one dare not venture into anything connected with other religions. The consequence of any one venturing into those areas would  bless him or her with a safe passage of  an ultimate journey  to the other  world  that will secure an  actual  audience with the God or Gods  of those  religions).  Licence to write should not be misused to write anything and everything that comes to one’s mind as interpretation. For instance, today’s article by Devdatt in  Economic Times (19.8.2017), draws a parallel between  the background  of Infosys corporate battle between  its founder and the board, to character of  Mahabharata. This article is not only  shallow  and very weak in content  but also contains  poorly drawn parallels.  First of all, it is incorrect to interpret Ramayana or Mahabharata for everyday events of 21st century and  keep drawing  parallels to every event. While these ancient literature and works  have loads of information on dharma sastra and good conduct which are meant to be followed in our daily life, the contents of these works are  only used by these self styled mythologists to read into those literature from the prism of today’s lifestyle. Nothing could be more misleading. Instead of being judgemental  on personalities (especially where these writers lack real knowledge  of  sanskrit language and invariably borrow from translated versions for their works ), these modern day writers  can serve better the cause of dharma by highlighting to younger generations the beauty and richness of these ancient scriptures and works including the moral values based on what our elders have left for us through their commentaries.  If one keeps thinking intensely on positive values, he will imbibe only positive qualities over a period of time  and if he thinks on negativities, he will only imbibe them. Constant contemplation on Lord Rama will bless one with His qualities and incessant thoughts about Ravana and his deeds will give one similar results. There is a saying in sanskrit, Yat Bhaavam, Tat Bhavati. You become that on which you contemplate. The choice is ours. Preferably, one should  read Ramayana or Mahabharata or Bhagavatam, with the help of  only authentic versions of translations, commentaries of great scholars. Then one will enjoy its beauty and understand  the actual meanings through proper interpretations.  For instance, Sri Mahaswami of Kanchi , always used to  highlight  that in order to understand the real meaning of Vedas, one should have mastered the Niruktas( etymology or systematic interpretation of words occurring in Vedas.). Similarly, one requires scholarly commentaries of itihasas to understand them.  Commentary of late Sri Thetihiyur Subramanya Sastrigal, on Valmiki Ramayana in tamil is quite famous like his work on Sri Shankara’s Soundarya Lahiri in tamil.  Sri Sastrigal, an exponent on Ramayana and Devi Upanasana, has come out with excellent interpretations of shlokas of Srimad Valmiki Ramayana, which could have been possible only due to his absolute devotion, expertise on the subject and language as also on account of  his experience born out of years of Sadhana.(It is learnt that he was initiated into Sri Vidya or Devi worship by His Holiness Sri Chandrasekhara Bharati Swamigal of Sringeri Mutt). We will see  one example of his vast knowledge on the subject.  Sri Rama  settles down in Panchavati with Sita Devi and Lakshmana. Shurpanaka, accidentally sees Sri Rama, Sri Sita and Sri Lakshmana .  Looking at Sri Rama’s handsome and divine form, she falls in love with him and enquires about them.  Here Sage Valmiki is at his poetic best, when he describes the contrasting personalities of Sri Rama and cruel demoness Shurpanaka. He is pleasant faced, having tender waist, lotus like eyes, beautiful lock of hair,  sporting magnetic personality, with a  pleasant voice. He attracts everyone around. He is   a handsome young man, a man of good conduct and thoughts. Contrast  this with the personality of  rakshasi,  who is looking cruel, having  protruding belly, cruel eyes, roaring terrifying voice, dishevelled hair, and frightening to look at, endowed  with a deceitful talk and full of bad thoughts and bad conduct.  When she enquires about them,  Sri Rama, ever wedded to truth, narrates  his background and how he landed up in Panchayati with his wife and brother. Then she entreats him to marry her and cast off Sri Sita. Sri Rama states that he is already wedded to Sri Sita and he cannot marry her. Instead, in a playful mood, he tells her to approach his brother, though a wedded  young man, has accompanied him  to forest alone and he would make an ideal companion to her. Believing in what Sri Rama said, she approaches Sri Lakshmana and entreats him with a similar request. Realising that it was a joke that Sri Rama had  played on him, he in turn tells her that he himself  is dependent on his brother and himself being a  slave, it may not be appropriate for her to marry him and become a slave’s wife. Instead she should go back to his elder brother. Lakshmana further states that his brother’s wife,  Sri Sita, is ugly looking, with a protruding belly, fierce looking  , one who is not a Sati or Pativrata, very old in age. Naturally Sri Rama will cast his wife  aside and marry Shurpanka only.  This is a very comical scene in Srimad Valmiki Ramayana. Both brothers play joke on the rakshasi and relying on the words of  the respective brothers to be true and not realising it was a joke played on her, she ultimately pounces on sri Sita Devi, upon which Sri Lakshmana, disfigures her by cutting her nose and ears. ( when Shurpanaka tries to pounce on Seetha Devi, Sri Rama tell his brother that it is not appropriate to joke with bad people) Now, it apparently looks like that Sri Lakshmana uses inappropriate adjectives to describe Sri Seetha such as Viroopa(ugly looking),  asatim( bad conduct), nirnatodari (with a protruding belly), karalaa (fierce looking) and  Virudda, of very old age. Though the words attributed to Sri Lakshmana, by the Sage poet, appear to be more comical than with a real intent, the doubt that naturally arises is  whether Sri Lakshmana could have  ever used these expressions to describe Sri Sita, whom he adores as his mother.    एनां विरुपामसतीं कराळां निर्णतोदरीम् | भार्यां वृद्धां परित्यज्य त्वामेवैष भजिष्यति || Enaam Viroopamasatim Karalaam Nirnatodarim| Bharyaam Vrudhaam Parityajya Tvaameshaiva Bhajishyati || (Leaving that old  lady with ugly form, protruding stomach, fierce look with a bad conduct, he will take you only as wife) Sri Thetiyur Subramanya Sastrigal by using Samasa (compound) here, peculiar  to the sanskrit language, gives a  different (scholarly) interpretation.  Taking the root stem Vi, could also mean Vishishta, that is incomparable beauty or form  and hence the expression Viroopa. A+satim could also mean “न विद्यते अन्यासती यस्याः, तां असतीं “(Na Vidhyate Anyasati yasyaaha, Taam Asatim”), there is no lady who is equal to her in Pativrata dharma, As per Samudrikaa Lakshana,  for ladies, she has the exact height prescribed  for uttama ladies or ladies of perfect form, which is indicated by the word “Karalaa” The usage of the word Nirnatodarim  could also mean  a lady with tender waist  and finally Viruddha here means one who has knowledge  or ripe knowledge.  With the usage of Samas,  the actual intended meaning of Sri Lakshmana is   beautifully brought out. That is the greatness of Sanskrit. Hence, while reading sanskrit texts such as these, it would be useful to go through commentaries of real scholars.

Rama, Surpanakha & Lakshmana in the words of Valmiki                                                   - By Thethiyur Periyavaa The beauty of interpretation of  Itihas and Puranas These days we are all flooded with information/write-ups/articles etc on different view points of Ramayana/ Mahabharata/Puranas/Chanakya Niti or anything connected with ancient culture/ sanskrit by any tom, dick and harry. Of all these, the gentleman Devdutt Patnaik, excels in the art of gibberish articles on Itihasas. One wonders whether he has adequate knowledge of sanskrit, going by the articles that he writes on Ramayana and Mahabharata and  his inappropriate  and incorrect interpretations of the ancient scriptures.  Unfortunately, his books are the best sellers (there are others who are also in the race like Amish Tripati, Anand Neelakantan etc.). While there should be sufficient space in literary world for different view points on all literature( of course, this is restricted only to Hindu scriptures and literature and one dare not venture into anything connected with other religions. The consequence of any one venturing into those areas would  bless him or her with a safe passage of  an ultimate journey  to the other  world  that will secure an  actual  audience with the God or Gods  of those  religions).  Licence to write should not be misused to write anything and everything that comes to one’s mind as interpretation. For instance, today’s article by Devdatt in  Economic Times (19.8.2017), draws a parallel between  the background  of Infosys corporate battle between  its founder and the board, to character of  Mahabharata. This article is not only  shallow  and very weak in content  but also contains  poorly drawn parallels.  First of all, it is incorrect to interpret Ramayana or Mahabharata for everyday events of 21st century and  keep drawing  parallels to every event. While these ancient literature and works  have loads of information on dharma sastra and good conduct which are meant to be followed in our daily life, the contents of these works are  only used by these self styled mythologists to read into those literature from the prism of today’s lifestyle. Nothing could be more misleading. Instead of being judgemental  on personalities (especially where these writers lack real knowledge  of  sanskrit language and invariably borrow from translated versions for their works ), these modern day writers  can serve better the cause of dharma by highlighting to younger generations the beauty and richness of these ancient scriptures and works including the moral values based on what our elders have left for us through their commentaries.  If one keeps thinking intensely on positive values, he will imbibe only positive qualities over a period of time  and if he thinks on negativities, he will only imbibe them. Constant contemplation on Lord Rama will bless one with His qualities and incessant thoughts about Ravana and his deeds will give one similar results. There is a saying in sanskrit, Yat Bhaavam, Tat Bhavati. You become that on which you contemplate. The choice is ours. Preferably, one should  read Ramayana or Mahabharata or Bhagavatam, with the help of  only authentic versions of translations, commentaries of great scholars. Then one will enjoy its beauty and understand  the actual meanings through proper interpretations.  For instance, Sri Mahaswami of Kanchi , always used to  highlight  that in order to understand the real meaning of Vedas, one should have mastered the Niruktas( etymology or systematic interpretation of words occurring in Vedas.). Similarly, one requires scholarly commentaries of itihasas to understand them.  Commentary of late Sri Thetihiyur Subramanya Sastrigal, on Valmiki Ramayana in tamil is quite famous like his work on Sri Shankara’s Soundarya Lahiri in tamil.  Sri Sastrigal, an exponent on Ramayana and Devi Upanasana, has come out with excellent interpretations of shlokas of Srimad Valmiki Ramayana, which could have been possible only due to his absolute devotion, expertise on the subject and language as also on account of  his experience born out of years of Sadhana.(It is learnt that he was initiated into Sri Vidya or Devi worship by His Holiness Sri Chandrasekhara Bharati Swamigal of Sringeri Mutt). We will see  one example of his vast knowledge on the subject.  Sri Rama  settles down in Panchavati with Sita Devi and Lakshmana. Shurpanaka, accidentally sees Sri Rama, Sri Sita and Sri Lakshmana .  Looking at Sri Rama’s handsome and divine form, she falls in love with him and enquires about them.  Here Sage Valmiki is at his poetic best, when he describes the contrasting personalities of Sri Rama and cruel demoness Shurpanaka. He is pleasant faced, having tender waist, lotus like eyes, beautiful lock of hair,  sporting magnetic personality, with a  pleasant voice. He attracts everyone around. He is   a handsome young man, a man of good conduct and thoughts. Contrast  this with the personality of  rakshasi,  who is looking cruel, having  protruding belly, cruel eyes, roaring terrifying voice, dishevelled hair, and frightening to look at, endowed  with a deceitful talk and full of bad thoughts and bad conduct.  When she enquires about them,  Sri Rama, ever wedded to truth, narrates  his background and how he landed up in Panchayati with his wife and brother. Then she entreats him to marry her and cast off Sri Sita. Sri Rama states that he is already wedded to Sri Sita and he cannot marry her. Instead, in a playful mood, he tells her to approach his brother, though a wedded  young man, has accompanied him  to forest alone and he would make an ideal companion to her. Believing in what Sri Rama said, she approaches Sri Lakshmana and entreats him with a similar request. Realising that it was a joke that Sri Rama had  played on him, he in turn tells her that he himself  is dependent on his brother and himself being a  slave, it may not be appropriate for her to marry him and become a slave’s wife. Instead she should go back to his elder brother. Lakshmana further states that his brother’s wife,  Sri Sita, is ugly looking, with a protruding belly, fierce looking  , one who is not a Sati or Pativrata, very old in age. Naturally Sri Rama will cast his wife  aside and marry Shurpanka only.  This is a very comical scene in Srimad Valmiki Ramayana. Both brothers play joke on the rakshasi and relying on the words of  the respective brothers to be true and not realising it was a joke played on her, she ultimately pounces on sri Sita Devi, upon which Sri Lakshmana, disfigures her by cutting her nose and ears. ( when Shurpanaka tries to pounce on Seetha Devi, Sri Rama tell his brother that it is not appropriate to joke with bad people) Now, it apparently looks like that Sri Lakshmana uses inappropriate adjectives to describe Sri Seetha such as Viroopa(ugly looking),  asatim( bad conduct), nirnatodari (with a protruding belly), karalaa (fierce looking) and  Virudda, of very old age. Though the words attributed to Sri Lakshmana, by the Sage poet, appear to be more comical than with a real intent, the doubt that naturally arises is  whether Sri Lakshmana could have  ever used these expressions to describe Sri Sita, whom he adores as his mother.    एनां विरुपामसतीं कराळां निर्णतोदरीम् | भार्यां वृद्धां परित्यज्य त्वामेवैष भजिष्यति || Enaam Viroopamasatim Karalaam Nirnatodarim| Bharyaam Vrudhaam Parityajya Tvaameshaiva Bhajishyati || (Leaving that old  lady with ugly form, protruding stomach, fierce look with a bad conduct, he will take you only as wife) Sri Thetiyur Subramanya Sastrigal by using Samasa (compound) here, peculiar  to the sanskrit language, gives a  different (scholarly) interpretation.  Taking the root stem Vi, could also mean Vishishta, that is incomparable beauty or form  and hence the expression Viroopa. A+satim could also mean “न विद्यते अन्यासती यस्याः, तां असतीं “(Na Vidhyate Anyasati yasyaaha, Taam Asatim”), there is no lady who is equal to her in Pativrata dharma, As per Samudrikaa Lakshana,  for ladies, she has the exact height prescribed  for uttama ladies or ladies of perfect form, which is indicated by the word “Karalaa” The usage of the word Nirnatodarim  could also mean  a lady with tender waist  and finally Viruddha here means one who has knowledge  or ripe knowledge.  With the usage of Samas,  the actual intended meaning of Sri Lakshmana is   beautifully brought out. That is the greatness of Sanskrit. Hence, while reading sanskrit texts such as these, it would be useful to go through commentaries of real scholars.