The Ramacaritam of Sandhyakaranandin

That's French for "the ancient system," as in the ancient system of feudal privileges and the exercise of autocratic power over the peasants. The ancien regime never goes away, like vampires and dinosaur bones they are always hidden in the earth, exercising a mysterious influence. It is not paranoia to believe that the elites scheme against the common man. Inform yourself about their schemes here.

The Ramacaritam of Sandhyakaranandin

Postby admin » Thu Apr 29, 2021 11:58 am

The Ramacaritam of Sandhyakaranandin
Edited with Sanskrit commentaries and English Translation
by Dr. R. C. Majumdar, M.A., Ph.D., Vice-chancellor, Dacca University,
Dr. Radhagovinda Basak, M.A., Ph.D., Professor of Sanskrit, Presidency College, Calcutta; Lecturer in Sanskrit, Calcutta University; Sometime Lecturer in Sanskrit, Dacca University,
AND
Pandit Nanigopal Banerji, Kavyatirtha, Sometime Lecturer in Sanskrit. Dacca University. Published by the Curator, THE VARENDRA RESEARCH MUSEUM, RAJSHAHI.
December, 1939

Exactly three years after their first meeting in October 1906, Gandhi met Vinayak again on 24 October 1909. The Indian community gathered to celebrate the festival of Vijayadashami, the tenth day following the nineday festivities and fasting of Navaratri. To avoid British surveillance, Englishmen were also invited. Nearly seventy Indians participated. Gandhi was invited to preside over the meeting. He agreed on the condition that ‘no controversial politics were to be touched upon’ and that he would rather speak on the greatness of the Ramayana. He was dressed in a swallow-tailed coat and stiff front shirt. In his address, Gandhi mentioned that the occasion of Vijayadashami that marked the victory of Lord Shri Ramachandra was a momentous one and that He needed to be honoured by every Indian as a historical personage. Gandhi went on:

Everyone, whether Hindu, Muslim or Parsi, should be proud of belonging to a country, which produced a man like Shri Ramachandra. To the extent that he was a great Indian, he should be honoured by every Indian. For the Hindus, he is a god. If India again produced a Ramachandra, a Sita, a Lakshmana and a Bharata, she would attain prosperity in no time. It should be remembered, of course, that before Ramachandra qualified for public service, he suffered exile in the forest for 12 years. Sita went through extreme suffering and Lakshmana lived without sleep all those years and observed celibacy. When Indians learn to live in that manner, they can, from that instant count themselves as free men. India has no other way of achieving happiness for herself.

-- Savarkar: Echoes from a Forgotten Past: 1883-1924, by Vikram Sampath


V. 12. That there is a perverse criticism of the work, because of its unprecedented character, from one who is mean and malicious -- itself testifies to its absolute purity. What can we do in this matter?

Another meaning which is suggested on the basis of Slesa is this:—

The word "khalikara" is derived from that word "khala" (by the grammatical change in form) in the sense of making up what it was not before by nature. (Thus the word implies making something "khala" or of inferior character, which it was not before by nature). Therefore this (grammatical form itself) is the obvious proof of its superior character. We have nothing to do in this matter.


-- The Ramacaritam of Sandhyakaranandin, by Dr. R. C. Majumdar, M.A., Ph.D., Dr. Radhagovinda Basak, M.A., Ph.D., Pandit Nanigopal Banerji



Highlights:

The manuscript of Ramacarita was discovered by MM. Pandit Haraprasad Sastri in 1897. It contained not only the complete text, but also a commentary of the first Canto and 85 verses of the second. The portion of the manuscript containing the commentary of the remaining verses was missing.

MM. Sastri printed the text and the commentary from this single manuscript in the Memoirs of the Asiatic Society of Bengal, Vol. Ill, No. 1. The scope of his work may be described in his own words: “The commentary, as may be expected, gives fuller account of the reign of Rampala (sic) than the text. The other portion of the text is difficult to explain, and I have not attempted to make a commentary of my own. But I have tried, in my introduction, to glean all the historical information possible by the help of the commentary and the inscriptions of the Pala dynasty, and other sources of information available to me In the introduction I have attempted to write a connected history of the Palas of Bengal from their election as kings in about 770 A.D. to the end of Madanpala’s (sic) reign” (pp. 1-2).

Ever since its publication the Ramacarita has been regarded as the most important literary document concerning the history of the Pala rule in Bengal. It has formed a subject of critical discussion by notable scholars, and many of its passages have been interpreted in different ways. Scholars have, however, experienced great difficulty in dealing with the text on account of the absence of any translation either of the commented or of the uncommented portion. The difficulty was rendered all the greater by certain readings and interpretations of MM. Sastri which proved to be erroneous on a closer examination of the manuscript. A new and critical edition of the text, with a running commentary and an English translation of the whole of it, was, therefore, a great desideratum....

The technique of composition is equally unique. Each verse of the poem has two meanings, one applicable to the story of the Ramayana, and the other to the history of the Pala kings...

The necessity of keeping to this double meaning obliged the author to use obscure words and unfamiliar expressions, and in particular to present personal and proper names in abbreviated and occasionally very twisted forms. Although the poem, as a literary composition, showed, therefore, technical skill of a high order, it was not likely to be fully intelligible to one not well acquainted with the history of the times. Fortunately this difficulty was realised before it was too late, and some one wrote a commentary for the elucidation of the subject-matter of the poem and thereby earned the gratitude of the posterity. This person, whose name is yet unknown, probably lived shortly after the author, and in any case must have flourished not long after, at a time when the events of the reign of Ramapala were still fresh in the minds of the people. This commentator appears to have quoted a lexicon in support of the two meanings of the word nana in verse 33 of Chapter II, which occurs in the lexicography (Vaijayanti) of Yadavaprakasa who is generally regarded to have flourished towards the end of the twelfth century A.D. MM. Sastri’s view that the commentary was probably written by the author himself while unnatural in itself, is positively disproved by the reference to different readings of the text in the commentary of verse 22 of Chapter I, for no author would possibly vouch for two different readings of his own text. Moreover, the commentator has often explained a word in more ways than one...

So far as the commented portion is concerned, we may be tolerably certain that the text has been handed down to us in its original form. The same thing cannot be said of the remaining part. As a matter of fact MM. Sastri observed that “the scribe seems to have omitted many verses after” verse 5 of Canto IV (p. 51, fn. I).1 [These figures within brackets, after reference to MM. Sastri’s view, refer to the pages of his edition of Ramacarita.] Fortunately the text itself supplies us a means of checking the extent of the loss, though this was overlooked by MM. Sastri. At the end of the text we have the words “Arya— 220” clearly written, but this has been omitted in the text printed by MM. Sastri. These words were certainly intended to convey that the text consisted of 220 verses, all in arya metre. The Ms. contains only 215 verses in arya, and so only five verses have been left out, probably due to the carelessness of the scribe.

The author of the poem, Sandhyakaranandi, has given a short account of himself in the concluding portion of the text called Kaviprasasti. He was an inhabitant of the village called Brihadvatu2 [MM. Sastri evidently took this word as an adjective and not a proper name...

The concluding verse of Canto IV shows that the poem was actually composed, at least finished, during the reign of Madanapala, the son of Ramapala and third in succession from him.1 [MM. Sastri calls Madanapala the fourth king from Ramapala. This is misleading, for only two kings — Kumarapala and Gopala — intervened between the two.]

Sandhyakaranandi was a Karana (Kayastha) by caste.2 [MM. Sastri calls Sandhyakaranandi a Brahmana, but in verse 3 of the Kaviprasasti, Prajapatinandi, the father of Sandhyakara, is described as the ‘foremost among the Karanas.’ The Karanas generally denote a Kayastha. According to MM. Sastri the family derived its cognomen from the residential village called Nanda, and is “still well-known.” He, however, cites no evidence.]...

But whatever view we might take of the attitude of the author towards Mahipala, there is absolutely no justification for the following statement made by MM. Sastri:

“Mahipala by his impolitic acts incurred the displeasure of his subjects ..... The Kaivartas were smarting under oppression of the king. Bhima, the son of Rudoka, taking advantage of the popular discontent, led his Kaivarta subjects to rebellion.” (p. 13)

There is not a word in RC to show that Mahipala incurred the displeasure of his subjects by his impolitic acts or that there was a general popular discontent against him. It is an amazing invention to say that “the Kaivartas were smarting under oppression of the king," for the RC does not contain a single word which can even remotely lead to such a belief. It is a travesty of facts to hold that Bhima led his Kaivarta subjects (?) to rebellion. The rebellion was led by a number of feudal vassals and there is no evidence to show that they belonged solely, or even primarily, to the Kaivarta caste. There is again nothing to show that Bhima had anything to do with the rebellion, far less that he led it. Such an assumption seems to be absurd in view of the fact that he was the third king in succession after Divya who occupied the throne of Varendra after the rebellion. There is again nothing in RC to show that during the reign of Mahipala the Kaivartas formed a distinct political entity under Divya or Bhima, so that they might be regarded as the subjects of the latter.

This tissue of misstatements, unsupported by anything in the text of RC, is responsible for a general belief that Mahipala was an oppressive king, and has even led sober historians to misjudge his character and misconstrue the events of his reign. A popular myth has been sedulously built up to the effect that there was a general rising of people which cost Mahipala his life and throne, that it was merely a popular reaction against the oppression and wickedness of the king, and that, far from being rebellious in character, it was an assertion of the people’s right to dethrone a bad and unpopular king and elect a popular chief in his place. In other words, in fighting and killing Mahipala the people of Varendra were inspired by the noblest motive of saving the country from his tyranny and anarchy. Some even proceeded so far as to say that this act was followed by a general election of Divya as the king of Varendra, and a great historian has compared the whole episode with that which led to the election of Gopala, the founder of the Pala dynasty, to the throne of Bengal.1 [ A movement has been set on foot by a section of the Kaivarta or Mahisya community in Bengal to perpetuate the memory of Divya, on the basis of the view-points noted above. They refuse to regard him as a rebel and hold him up as a great hero called to the throne by the people of Varendra to save it from the oppressions of Mahipala. An annual ceremony — Divya-smriti-utsava -- is organized by them and the speeches, made on these occasions by eminent historians like Sir Jadunath Sarkar, Rai Bahadur Rama Prasad Chanda, and Dr. Upendranath Ghoshal [1886-1969; President of The Asiatic Society of Bengal 1963-1964; Author of: Studies in Indian history and culture (1957); A History of Hindu Political Theories: From the Earliest Times to the End of the First Quarter of the Seventeenth Century A.D. (1927); A History of Indian Public Life (1966); Ancient Indian culture in Afghanistan (1928); Contributions to the history of the Hindu revenue system (1929); The agrarian syste in ancient India (1930)] who presided over the function seek to support the popular views. On the other hand attempts have been made to show that these popular views are not supported by the statements in Ramacarita (cf. Bharatavarsa, 1342, pp. 18 ff.).]

This is not the proper place or occasion to criticise these views at length, or to refer to many other important conclusions which have been drawn from MM. Sastri’s sketch of the life and character of Mahipala. But in view of the deep-rooted prejudices and errors which are still current in spite of the exposition of the unwarranted character of MM. Sastri’s interpretation, it is necessary to draw attention to what is really stated in RC about the great rebellion and the part played by Divya. The author of RC did not regard the rising in any other light than a dire calamity which enveloped the kingdom in darkness (I. 22). He describes it as anika dharma-viplava or the unholy or unfortunate civil revolution (1. 24), bhavasya apadam or the calamity of the world, and damaram which the commentator explains as upaplava or disturbance (I. 27). Further, the latter describes it as merely a rebellion of feudal vassals (ananta-samanta-cakra), and not a word is said about its popular character. There is even no indication that the rebels belonged to Varendra or that the encounter between Mahipala and the rebels took place within that province. Such revolts were not uncommon in different parts of the Pala kingdom in those days. Similar revolts placed in power the Kamboja chiefs in Varendra and Radha, and the family of Sudraka in Gaya district. 1 [For a detailed discussion of this point and a view of Divya’s rebellion in its true perspective cf. Dr. R C. Majumdar’s article ‘The Revolt of Divvoka against Mahipala II and other revolts in Bengal’ in Dacca University Studies Vol. I, No. 2, pp. 125 ff.]

There is not a word in RC to the effect that Divya2 [The name is written variously in RC as Divya (1. 38), Divvoka (1. 38-39 commentary), and Divoka (I. 31 commentary).] was the leader of a popular rebellion, far less that he was elected as king by the people. As a matter of fact his name is not associated in any way even with the fight between Mahipala and his rebellious chiefs (milit-ananta-samanta-cakra) referred to in Verse I. 31. The RC only tells us that “Ramapala’s beautiful fatherland (Varendri) was occupied by his enemy named Divya, an (officer) sharing royal fortune, who rose to a high position, (but) who took to fraudulent practice as a vow” (I. 38). The account given in RC is not incompatible with the view that Mahipala met with a disastrous defeat in an encounter with some rebellious vassals in or outside Varendra, and Divya took advantage of it to seize the throne for himself. That the author of RC did not entertain any favourable view of the character and policy of Divya is clear from the two adjectives applied to him, viz., dasyu and upadhivrati. The commentator says ‘dasyuna satruna tadbhavapannatvat.’ It is obvious that the commentator means that the term dasyu refers to the enemy (Divya) as he had assumed the character of a dasyu (enemy). As to the other expression upadhivrati, the commentator first explains vrata as ‘something which is undertaken as an imperative duty,’ and then adds ‘chadmani vrati.’ In other words, Divya performed an act on the plea that it was an imperative duty, but this was a merely false pretension. In any case the two words in the text ‘dasyu’ and ‘upadhi’ cannot be taken by any stretch of imagination to imply any good or noble trait in his character...

MM. Sastri wrote (p. 13) that Bhima ‘built a Damara, a suburban city close to the capital of the Pala empire’. The only foundation for this misstatement is the expression wrongly read by him as damaram-upapuram etc’ in the commentary to v. I. 27. The expression, as correctly read, viz ‘damaram-upaplavam,’ shows that there is no reference to any city, far less to any capital city founded by Bhima, as Mr. R. D. Banerji imagined.1 [Op. cit., p. 291.]...

It has been noted above that Ramapala and his elder brother Surapala were both in prison when Mahipala was defeated by the rebellious chiefs. What became of them after this catastrophe is not expressly stated. MM. Sastri’s statement that “they were rescued by their friends” (p. 18), presumably even before the revolution, is not borne out by RC. It is clear, however, that somehow or other they managed to escape and leave Varendra. Although there is no subsequent reference to Surapala in RC it is clear from v. 14 of the Manhali copper-plate of Madanapala that Surapala ascended the throne after the death of Mahipala II. Of the events of his reign we know nothing. But the silence of RC about Surapala’s later history certainly does not justify, in any way, the assumption made by Mr. R. D. Banerji that he was murdered by Ramapala. 1 [Op. cit, p. 280.]...

The author of Sabdapradipa, whose father served Ramapala, was himself the court-physician of a king Bhimapala, ruler of Padi. MM. Sastri identifies him with the Kaivarta king Bhima (RC Introd. p. 15). This does not seem probable. It is more likely that Bhimapala either belonged to the family of Pala rulers in S. Bengal whose existence has been revealed by the Sundarban copper-plate grant, dated 1196 A.D. (I. H. Q., Vol. X, p. 321) or is to be identified with Bhimayasas, king of Pithi, one of the chiefs who helped Ramapala. In that case Padi may be regarded as a mistake for Pithi.]...

[MM. Sastri identifies Bala-Balabhi with Bagdi (p. 14), but there is no evidence in support of it.]...

Soma of Paduvanva not identified.2 [Paduvanva may be the origin of the name Pabna as MM. Sastri suggests (p. 14), but there is no evidence in support of it, except the similarity of the two names.]...

MM. Sastri seems to have misunderstood the passage describing the conclusion of the war. Thus he writes: “Hari at last found himself powerless, was captured, and led to the place of execution. Bhima, too, seems to have been put to the sword” (p. 14). Far from being executed, Hari was ‘established in a position of great influence’ by Ramapala after the battle was over (III. 32). Evidence of further cordial relations between Ramapala and Hari is furnished by verses III. 39-40 which tell us that Ramapala and Hari met together and shone for a long time in each other’s close embrace in the palace” at Ramavati. Probably the same cordiality existed also between Hari and Madanapala (IV. 37, 40).

The subsequent treatment to Hari justifies the inference made above, that Hari was won over by Ramapala or his son Vittapala by offer of money, and this defection finally shattered the resistance offered by Bhima’s partisans.

The scattered references to Hari leave no doubt that he became a distinguished person of great importance and was held in great love and esteem by the Pala kings.

After the final collapse of the forces of Bhima, Ramapala took possession of his immense riches, and “occupied after a long time the dearest land of Varendri” (III. I). He restored peace and order in Varendra (III. 27) and founded a new city there called Ramavati. The poet gives a glowing account of Varendra, which was also his own fatherland, in twenty-seven verses (III. 2-28), and refers to Ramavati in the next twelve verses (III. 29-40). MM. Sastri took all these verses to refer to Ramavati and hence remarked that Ramapala founded a city named Ramavati at the confluence of the Ganges and the Ivaratoya. As a matter of fact it was Varendra and not Ramavati which is referred to by the author as situated between these two rivers. MM. Sastri’s interpretation has misled many scholars to look for the city of Ramavati at the confluence of the Ganges and the Karatoya for which there is no warrant in the text itself. Ramavati is most likely to be identified with Ramauti, mentioned in Ain-i-Akbari as a fiscal unit (circle) in the Sarkar of Lakhnauti...

In addition to what is stated in v. 24 other political persons and events are referred to in course of the description of Varendra, by way of veiled allusions; but it is now impossible to understand their full import in the absence of a contemporary commentary. Thus mention is made of several potentates in verses 2-4 viz., Srihetvisvara, Candesvara, Ksemesvara, and Skanda, but we do not know who they were and in what connection they are referred to. MM. Sastri's contention that the advice of the first three of these kings was followed by Ramapala in selecting the site of the city of Ramavati is a pure guess, and obviously incorrect, as the verses in question have nothing to do with that city....

Kamarupa was conquered by an allied king to whom Ramapala showed great honour (II. 47). MM. Sastri’s view that Mayana was the name of this conqueror (p. 15) is due to his error in reading the compound word “mahimanam = apa na=nrpo” as “mahimana-mayana- nrpa.” It is impossible to ascertain the names of, or say anything definite about, the various kings referred to in the above verses...

The verse referring to the reign of Gopala (IV. 12), for example, seems to contain some dark hints about his premature and unnatural death, but we are unable to solve the mystery. Very great prominence is, again, given to an allied king Candra, who is described in five verses (IV. 16-20) and was one of the most reliable friends of the king. This king Candra is probably to be identified with the son of Suvarpadeva and grandson of Mahana, ruler of Anga.1 [Cf. I. H. Q„ Vol. V, pp. 35 ff. The view originally propounded by MM. II. P. Sastri (p. 16), and subsequently followed by Mr. R. D. Banerji and others, that this king Candra was the Gahadavala ruler of Kanauj is untenable, as according to the scheme of chronology, now generally adopted, Madanapala ascended the throne after the latter’s death....

A pitched battle on the Kalindi river is alluded to in v. IV. 27. 1 [It is difficult to accept the conclusion drawn by MM. H. P. Sastri from this verse that the Bengal army fought a battle against the enemies of Kanauj on the banks of the Yamuna”. (p. 16).]


-- The Ramacaritam of Sandhyakaranandin


CONTENTS: [PDF here]

• Preface
• Introduction
• Canto I: "Rama in Action"
• Canto II: [Probably the chapter was named “the slaughter of the enemy by Rama”.]
• Canto III: “The Return of Rama"
• Canto IV: ‘‘The later career of Rama.”
• Canto V: [Conclusion]
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 33177
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: The Ramacaritam of Sandhyakaranandin

Postby admin » Thu Apr 29, 2021 11:59 am

PREFACE

The manuscript of Ramacarita was discovered by MM. Pandit Haraprasad Sastri in 1897. It contained not only the complete text, but also a commentary of the first Canto and 85 verses of the second. The portion of the manuscript containing the commentary of the remaining verses was missing.

MM. Sastri printed the text and the commentary from this single manuscript in the Memoirs of the Asiatic Society of Bengal, Vol. Ill, No. 1. The scope of his work may be described in his own words: “The commentary, as may be expected, gives fuller account of the reign of Rampala (sic) than the text. The other portion of the text is difficult to explain, and I have not attempted to make a commentary of my own. But I have tried, in my introduction, to glean all the historical information possible by the help of the commentary and the inscriptions of the Pala dynasty, and other sources of information available to me. In the introduction I have attempted to write a connected history of the Palas of Bengal from their election as kings in about 770 A.D. to the end of Madanpala’s (sic) reign” (pp. 1-2).

Ever since its publication the Ramacarita has been regarded as the most important literary document concerning the history of the Pala rule in Bengal. It has formed a subject of critical discussion by notable scholars, and many of its passages have been interpreted in different ways. Scholars have, however, experienced great difficulty in dealing with the text on account of the absence of any translation either of the commented or of the uncommented portion. The difficulty was rendered all the greater by certain readings and interpretations of MM. Sastri which proved to be erroneous on a closer examination of the manuscript. A new and critical edition of the text, with a running commentary and an English translation of the whole of it, was, therefore, a great desideratum.


In order to supply this long-felt need two of us undertook, about ten years ago, to bring out a new edition of the text to be published by the University of Dacca. Some time after we had begun our task we came to learn that one of our colleagues was engaged in editing the text on behalf of the Varendra Research Society, Rajshahi. It was immediately felt by us that the unnecessary duplication could be avoided, and perhaps a more improved edition could be brought out, if we three joined in our common task. The Varendra Research Society heartily agreed to the proposal, and this new edition of Ramacarita, published by the Varendra Research Society, thus came to be the joint work of us three.

At the time when we commenced to work under this new arrangement all three of us were teachers of the University of Dacca. But some time later Dr. R. G. Basak left this University to join the Presidency College, Calcutta. This circumstance is mainly responsible for the long delay in the publication of this work. For almost each single verse in the uncommented portion gave rise to difficulties, and, in many cases, led to differences of views, which had to be settled by correspondence. It has been our aim to arrive at an interpretation agreed upon by all of us, and thanks to prolonged discussion, partly oral, and partly by correspondence, this has been possible in almost all cases. In a few instances where such an agreement became impossible, the alternative meaning proposed by any one of us has been recorded in the footnote.

The text has been carefully prepared by an independent study of the original manuscript. It was read by all three of us together and we have noted in all cases the differences from that published by MM. Sastri.

It has been an arduous task to interpret and write a commentary upon verses containing hidden allusions, and referring to incidents, fresh in the mind of the writer, but forgotten long since and completely unknown either to history or to tradition. It is, therefore, too much to expect that our views will be free from blemish or criticism. But if we have succeeded in dispelling, even to a small extent, the almost complete darkness that surrounded the incidents described in the latter part of the book, and in helping others to throw fresh light where we have failed, we shall regard our labours amply rewarded.

In preparing the English translation our aim has been to make it literal rather than idiomatic. The translation of the uncommented portion is, of course, based on the commentary added by us to each verse.

The addition of an independent commentary of the latter part of the text and the English translation of the whole book have made the scope of our work wider than that of MM. Sastri. But in one respect we have restricted it. As noted above, MM. Sastri added in the Introduction a connected history of the Palas in Bengal. At the time when he wrote, this was rendered necessary by the paucity of general knowledge on the subject. Happily, it is no longer so. The history of the Palas has since been treated in several historical works, and is fairly well-known, at least in its broad outline. We have not, therefore, attempted this task, but have merely confined ourselves in our Introduction to the elucidation of the episode treated in the Ramacarita.

We are indebted to Kumar Sarat Kumar Roy of Dighapatiya for having readily agreed to publish this edition at his own expense, but on behalf of the Varendra Research Society. Our thanks are also due to the Royal Asiatic Society of Bengal for having kindly placed at our disposal the unique manuscript of Ramacarita. The book has been printed by Babu Sures Chandra Das, M.A. [Relative of Babu Sarat Chandra Das ?], one of our old students, in his own Press. He has taken more than ordinary care in seeing it through the press, and we take this opportunity of thanking him for all the troubles he took on our behalf.

Nevertheless some mistakes have crept in and a list of corrections has been added. For this we can only crave the indulgence of the reader.

September 15, 1939

R. C. Majumdar
R.G. Basak
N. G. Banerji
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 33177
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: The Ramacaritam of Sandhyakaranandin

Postby admin » Thu Apr 29, 2021 12:00 pm

Part 1 of 2

INTRODUCTION

I. THE TEXT AND ITS AUTHOR


The Ramacarita is a unique composition in many respects. It gives an historical account of the successful revolution in Northern Bengal which cost the Pala king Mahipala his life and throne, and of the restoration of the paternal kingdom by Ramapala, his youngest brother. This great revolution, and specially the restoration, form the main theme of the work, and we know of no other Indian text which deals with an important contemporary historical episode with such wealth of details. The technique of composition is equally unique. Each verse of the poem has two meanings, one applicable to the story of the Ramayana, and the other to the history of the Pala kings. The common element in the names Ramacandra and Ramapala no doubt suggested the peculiar nature of the composition, and it was facilitated by the story of loss and recovery of Varendri, which was the name of the fatherland (janaka-bhu) of Ramapala; both these words being also applicable as an epithet to Sita, the beloved wife of Ramacandra, who was stolen by Ravana and recovered by him. Round this central imagery the poet, by his wonderful command of the Sanskrit language, has woven a masterly epic poem which, taken in one sense, gives the well-known story of the Ramayana and, in another sense, a detailed account of the life and reign of Ramapala.

The necessity of keeping to this double meaning obliged the author to use obscure words and unfamiliar expressions, and in particular to present personal and proper names in abbreviated and occasionally very twisted forms.
Although the poem, as a literary composition, showed, therefore, technical skill of a high order, it was not likely to be fully intelligible to one not well acquainted with the history of the times. Fortunately this difficulty was realised before it was too late, and some one wrote a commentary for the elucidation of the subject-matter of the poem and thereby earned the gratitude of the posterity. This person, whose name is yet unknown, probably lived shortly after the author, and in any case must have flourished not long after, at a time when the events of the reign of Ramapala were still fresh in the minds of the people. This commentator appears to have quoted a lexicon in support of the two meanings of the word nana in verse 33 of Chapter II, which occurs in the lexicography (Vaijayanti) of Yadavaprakasa who is generally regarded to have flourished towards the end of the twelfth century A.D. MM. Sastri’s view that the commentary was probably written by the author himself,1 [A Descriptive Catalogue of Sanskrit Manuscripts in the Government collection under the care of the Asiatic Society of Bengal, by MM. H. P. Shastri, Calcutta (1923) Vol. IV, p. 1.] while unnatural in itself, is positively disproved by the reference to different readings of the text in the commentary of verse 22 of Chapter I, for no author would possibly vouch for two different readings of his own text. Moreover, the commentator has often explained a word in more ways than one.


It is reasonable to hold that this unknown person wrote a commentary of the whole text, though actually, in the single manuscript that we possess, the commentary does not run beyond verse 35 of Canto II. The discovery of another manuscript may at any future date give us the missing portion of the commentary.

The manuscripts of the text and the commentary are written by different persons, in proto-Bengali character current in the twelfth century A.D. The text, written by Silacandra, contains many slips and errors. The scribe of the manuscript containing the commentary is unknown, but was evidently more learned than Silacandra.

So far as the commented portion is concerned, we may be tolerably certain that the text has been handed down to us in its original form. The same thing cannot be said of the remaining part. As a matter of fact MM. Sastri observed that “the scribe seems to have omitted many verses after” verse 5 of Canto IV (p. 51, fn. I).1 [These figures within brackets, after reference to MM. Sastri’s view, refer to the pages of his edition of Ramacarita.] Fortunately the text itself supplies us a means of checking the extent of the loss, though this was overlooked by MM. Sastri. At the end of the text we have the words “Arya— 220” clearly written, but this has been omitted in the text printed by MM. Sastri. These words were certainly intended to convey that the text consisted of 220 verses, all in arya metre. The Ms. contains only 215 verses in arya, and so only five verses have been left out, probably due to the carelessness of the scribe.

The author of the poem, Sandhyakaranandi, has given a short account of himself in the concluding portion of the text called Kaviprasasti. He was an inhabitant of the village called Brihadvatu2 [MM. Sastri evidently took this word as an adjective and not a proper name. (See p 153 fn. 4).] situated close to the city of Purujravardhana, and belonged to what he calls the illustrious family of the Nandins. He was the grandson of Pinakanandi and the son of Prajapatinandi. Prajapatinandi was an important personage and held the office of Sandhivigrahika (Minister of Peace and War), presumably under Ramapala. Sandhyakara devotes several verses to a flattering description of his own poetic skill and a scathing condemnation of those who dared to criticise or slander his writings. It is evident that he had his enemies, and, presumably for that reason, did not publish his poem Ramacarita immediately after it was composed. It was at first kept carefully concealed, but gradually stray verses passed from mouth to mouth, and, attracted by their beauty, a band of admirers rescued the work from oblivion. The detailed and pointed reference to the so-called slanderers seems to suggest that either the author had some personal or political enemies whom he had good reason to dread, or some other poetical work, previously written by him, had been adversely criticised. But whatever might have been the opinion of those whom he regarded as his professed enemies, the author had no doubt in his own mind about his own high poetic talents, and modesty was certainly not a trait in his character. He did not hesitate even to call his poem ‘a Ramayana of the Kali age’ and describe himself as Kali-kala-Valmiki, i.e. Valmiki of the Kali age.


V. 12. That there is a perverse criticism of the work, because of its unprecedented character, from one who is mean and malicious -- itself testifies to its absolute purity. What can we do in this matter?

Another meaning which is suggested on the basis of Slesa is this:—

The word "khalikara" is derived from that word "khala" (by the grammatical change in form) in the sense of making up what it was not before by nature. (Thus the word implies making something "khala" or of inferior character, which it was not before by nature). Therefore this (grammatical form itself) is the obvious proof of its superior character. We have nothing to do in this matter.

V. 13. Let there remain a traducer in whoso constant criticism there is an advertisement of literary works by a worthy one— this being done, its transmission among the populace is seen to yield beneficial results— just as a threshing floor is desired to be there for those who are busily engaged in their work (of cultivation) — in treading round which (viz. the threshing floor) the movement by the bullock not tied by a rope is found to be of good result, the corn being threshed and heaped up.

Image


V. 14. The person who desires to shade (lit. make low) the moon shining so high by placing his hands up is a veritable blind man, for (by that action) he darkens his own self.

V. 15. On apprehending the dull and senseless people as bottomless sin itself in hiding, in this and that place, this poem (Ramacaritam) as a stream of Rasa, formed compactly of many inherent beauties, was kept carefully concealed (i.e. unpublished),— just as on the apprehension that a pool of water is nothing but quagmire, deep unfathomably and covered (completely under water) in this and that place, the mild cow streaming with sweet milk is kept carefully tied up with a mass of ropes.

V. 16. Speech— the fair one— passing from lip to lip (lit. through tongue) came out, with the picturesquely formed lines having symmetrical arrangement of words. Good men in their hundreds are here voluntarily to rescue her (from vile attacks);—(the meaning suggested--) even as the cow, with the rope with which she was tied down, came out step by step with the beautiful chain on her legs; and good men in their hundreds are here voluntarily to rescue her from the quagmire.

V. 17. Praise only the worthy ones who defend from heartless (attackers) this sacred poem. (Those) wise men shed nectar even from (what is more) sound through (a process of) refinement using only their tongue as the (necessary) appliance (for it).


-- -- The Ramacaritam of Sandhyakaranandin, by Dr. R. C. Majumdar, M.A., Ph.D., Dr. Radhagovinda Basak, M.A., Ph.D., Pandit Nanigopal Banerji


Sandhyakaranandi was a contemporary of Ramapala and, by virtue of the high office of his father, had ample opportunities of knowing the inner history of the stirring political events of his time. The concluding verse of Canto IV shows that the poem was actually composed, at least finished, during the reign of Madanapala, the son of Ramapala and third in succession from him.1 [MM. Sastri calls Madanapala the fourth king from Ramapala. This is misleading, for only two kings — Kumarapala and Gopala — intervened between the two.]

Sandhyakaranandi was a Karana (Kayastha) by caste.2 [MM. Sastri calls Sandhyakaranandi a Brahmana, but in verse 3 of the Kaviprasasti, Prajapatinandi, the father of Sandhyakara, is described as the ‘foremost among the Karanas.’ The Karanas generally denote a Kayastha. According to MM. Sastri the family derived its cognomen from the residential village called Nanda, and is “still well-known.” He, however, cites no evidence.] He begins his poem with two opening verses which contain invocations to Visnu and Siva. So it appears that he was Brahmanical in religion.

The words in the manuscript at the commencement of both the text and the commentary, which indicate a salutation to Srighana or Buddha
,3 [Cf. Verse 7 of the Bodh-Gaya Inscription of Jayaccandradeva (I. H. Q., Vol. V, p. 20).] seem to have been written by the scribes, one of whom, Silacandra, as his name suggests was probably a Buddhist. If, however, the words of salutation to the Buddha at the beginning of the text are taken as having been written originally by the poet himself, he may be credited with some attachment to Buddhism, the religion of his royal patrons.

II. THE CONTENTS OF RAMACARITA4 [The abbreviation RC has been used for Ramacarita in the following pages. (Figures within brackets refer to the Canto and the verse of the Text).]

After the formal invocations the author refers to Dharmapala as The ornament of the family of the Palas, who bore the burden of the earth as far as the seas (I. 5)’. It is worthy of note that he does not mention Gopala, and his comparison of Dharmapala with Iksvaku (I. 4) and description of the Pala kings as born in Dharmapala's family (I. 5) seem to indicate that he regarded Dharmapala, rather than Gopala, as the founder of the royal family of the Palas. This can only be explained by the greater eminence and renown of Dharmapala who really laid the foundations of the Pala empire and the greatness of the family.


The author makes a passing reference to the origin of the Pala family (I. 4), but unfortunately it is too meagre and obscure to be of any real help in solving this knotty problem. After making an invocation, which is applicable both to the Sun and the Ocean (1.3) the author says that Dharmapala was born in his family (I. 4). The commentator takes the pronoun to refer to the Sun in the case of Iksvaku, the progenitor of Rama, and to the Ocean, in the case of Dharmapala. It is not, however, easy to understand what is implied by saying that Dharmapala was born in the family of the Ocean (samudra). Mr. R. D. Banerji has drawn attention to an echo of this tradition in the story, recorded by Ghanarama in his Dharmamangala, that when Dharmapala’s queen Vallabha lived in the forest, the ocean (samudra) enjoyed her person and a son was born to her.1 [Banglar Itihasa, Second Edition, pp. 168-9.] Another tradition to the same effect is preserved by Taranatha. It is said that the younger queen of Gopala procured medicine from a Brahmana magician in order to win the favours of the king and bring him under her power. She mixed it with food, and ordered a slave-girl to take it to the king. While proceeding along a riverbank the feet of the girl slipped and the food fell into water. It was carried by the stream to the house of the Naga king Sagarapala, who ate it. Having assumed, by virtue of the medicine, the form of Gopala, he approached the queen and begot a son who ultimately succeeded Gopala on the throne.2 [Taranatha’s History of Buddhism -- Translated by A, Schiefner, pp, 208-9.]

These silly stories explain the popular tradition about the origin of the Palas from Samudra (Sagarapala or the ocean). But verse 2 of the Kamauli plates1 [Gaudalekhamala, p. 128.] of Vaidyadeva, a contemporary of Sandhyakaranandi, refers to the Pala kings as descended from the Sun. Mr. R. D. Banerji is of opinion that as Sandhyakaranandi’s reference to the origin of the Palas from samudra (Ocean) is in agreement with the account of Dharmamangala, it must be regarded as undoubtedly correct, and the account given in the Kamauli plates must be due to the ignorance of the writer of that document.2 [Op. cit., pp. 169-70.]

It is difficult to believe that an official of Vaidyadeva, who was so closely associated with the Palas, could be ignorant of the current traditional belief about the origin of that royal family. We are, therefore, bound to accept the view that the theory of solar origin of the Palas was also current about the time when both Vaidyadeva and Sandhyakaranandi lived. It is, therefore, very tempting to take the pronoun ‘tat’ in the expression tat-kula-dipa (I. 4) to refer to both the Sun and the Ocean, mentioned in the preceding verse. In other words, Sandhyakara perhaps very cleverly referred to both the traditions about the origin of the Pala family in vv. 3 and 4 of Canto I. This also explains, what would otherwise appear as somewhat unusual, viz., that the usual invocations to Siva and Visnu are followed by an invocation to the Ocean and the Sun. This verse was evidently introduced to enable the author to refer to the prevalent twofold traditions about the origin of the family. It is true that the commentator restricts himself to only one interpretation, but it may be one of the instances in which he failed to comprehend the whole meaning of the author.

There is a specific reference to Dharmapala’s fleet of stone-boats crossing the sea (I. 4). This might refer to a naval expedition, of which no other evidence has been preserved. What is meant by stone-boats (sila-nauka) is also not very clear. What important historical event is alluded to in this obscure passage, we shall perhaps never know.

Passing over the other Pala kings who succeeded Dharmapala, the author next mentions Vigrahapala, the third king of that name (I. 8). According to the text, Vigrahapala defeated Karna in battle, but protected him, and married Yauvanasri (I. 9). The commentator elucidates the passage by saying that this Karna was the king of Dahala, and Yauvanasri was his daughter, and that Vigrahapala, instead of uprooting the vanquished king Karna, protected him by concluding a peace with him known as kapalasandhi. Now this kapalasandhi has been explained both in Kautillya Arthasastra (Bk. VII— Ch. Ill) and Kamandakiya Nitisara (IX. 5). Under this form of agreement a very large amount of money has to be paid to the conqueror. According to Kamandakiya the two powers concluding the treaty are of equal strength and the treaty does not produce any mutual confidence. In other words, such a treaty brings about cessation of hostilities but no lasting peace or friendship between the adversaries. It may be noted here in passing that another daughter of this very Karna, named Virasri,1 [N. G. Majumdar— Ins. of Bengal, Vol. III, p. 17.] was married by the Varman king Jatavarman of East Bengal.

The commentator’s view of the political relations between Vigrahapala and the Kalacuri king Kama is probably not very far from truth. The long-drawn struggle between the Kalacuris and the Palas commenced in the latter part of the tenth century A.D., with the raids of two successive Kalacuri kings, Yuvaraja and his son Laksmanaraja against northern and southern Bengal. The struggle was renewed by the great Kalacuri emperor Gangeyadeva, who is described even by his enemies as the conqueror of the world. He defeated the Pala king, either Mahipala I or his son Nayapala, conquered Benares, and might have extended his conquest even further east. His son Karna or Laksmikarna continued the campaign against the Palas. We get some details of the struggle between Nayapala and Karna from the Tibetan source. It seems that at first Karna defeated Nayapala, but later the fortunes of war turned against the Kalacuri king. When his troops ‘were being slaughtered by the troops’ of Nayapala, the great Buddhist teacher Dipamkara Srijnana (also known as Atisa), who was at that time residing in Mahabodhi, intervened, and succeeded, with great difficulty, in inducing the two hostile kings to conclude a treaty on the basis of the mutual restitution of all conquests and plunder.1 [J. B. T. S. Vol. I, pp. 9-10.]

Verse, I. 9, of RC shows that this treaty was merely an interlude and the struggle was renewed in the time of Vigrahapala  III, the son and successor of Nayapala. Karna had, during the interval, secured a position of supremacy by destroying the Paramaras and the Candellas and conquering the upper valley of the Mahanadi. In the renewed campaign Karna must have scored great success at the beginning. That he advanced at least up to the border of Bengal is proved by his record on a pillar at Paikor in the district of Birbhum. It appears, however, from verse I. 9 of RC that, as on the previous occasion, Karna was defeated by Vigrahapala. If the commentator of RC is to be believed, Karna had to buy peace by offering large treasures, and the alliance was cemented by the marriage of Vigrahapala with Karna’s daughter. This long-drawn struggle must have exhausted the strength of the Palas and undermined their power and prestige to a certain extent, and it may be held as, at least partly, responsible for the calamity that befell the Pala kingdom shortly after the death of Vigrahapala III.

This calamity forms the main subject-matter of RC which gives a somewhat detailed account of the history of the Palas from the accession of Mahipala II, the eldest son and successor of Vigrahapala III.

After mentioning the marriage of Vigrahapala III with Yauvanasri the RC states (I. 10) that three sons were born to him, viz., Mahipala (II) Surapala, and Ramapala.2 [RC does not say that these sons were born of Yauvanasri. The fact that the Rastrakuta chief Mahapa is later referred to as the maternal uncle of Ramapala indicates that the Kalacuri princess Yauvanasri was not the mother of the latter.] Then follow a long string of verses in praise of Ramapala, the youngest of the three sons, but from incidental references contained in these verses we can form a pretty good idea of the political events which occurred immediately after the death of Vigrahapala III.

It is obvious from the manner in which the author continues the account after Vigrahapala III that he wrote the history entirely from the standpoint of Ramapala, and as a professed partisan of this patron king, whom he regarded as the hero of the whole episode, and as an ideal king like Ramacandra. Suspicion, therefore, naturally attaches to his statement about the adversaries of Ramapala, and in this category we have to include, as subsequent events will show, both his elder brother Mahapala II as well as the Kaivarta chiefs who seized his paternal kingdom. Although the author occasionally showed an unusual degree of generosity by bestowing praises upon both, it is hardly to be expected that he could always take an impartial view of men and things, and that his judgment was not warped by a deep-rooted faith and belief in the innate honesty and injured innocence of Ramapala and the villainy of those who were opposed to him and responsible for all his troubles and sufferings. This point must always be kept in view in making an estimate of the historical value of the account that follows, particularly as we possess no independent source of information to test the soundness of either the general view of the author or the accuracy of his statements. On the other hand, it would be unwise to conclude that the adversaries of Ramapala were necessarily just and honest, or that what the author says about them is the reverse of truth and we have every right to re-construe their history in a more favourable light by supplying facts from our own imagination.

We shall, therefore, proceed to sketch the account of the Palas subsequent to the death of Vigrahapala III, exactly and in so far as it can be gleaned from the text of the RC supplemented by the commentary. How far it can be regarded as true is to be decided by the historian, bearing in mind what has just been stated above.

Mahipala II being the eldest son succeeded his father Vigrahapala III. Only two incidents of his reign are mentioned in RC, viz., the imprisonment of his two younger brothers, and the great revolution that cost him his life and throne.

As regards the first we are told that the report of mischievous people led the king foolishly to believe that Ramapala was plotting to seize his throne, and, suspecting this danger, he put both his younger brothers Ramapala and Surapala in chains and confined them in a prison-cell. This action is condemned as an act of fraudulence (I. 37) by the author who calls the king as “given to wonderful tricks and hard as a solid pavement of stone” (I. 32), and describes him as “determined not to protect truth and polity” (1.36).

As regards the second, RC merely refers to anitikarambha, or an impolitic enterprise of Mahipala (I. 31). In explaining this the commentator tells us that Mahipala, when faced by a rebellion of a large number of his vassals or chiefs (milit-ananta-samanta-cakra), who had a powerful and well-equipped army, disregarded the advice ministers and rashly advanced to the fight. This was the impolitic enterprise and it led to a veritable disaster, for Mahipala was defeated and killed, and Varendri was lost to the Palas. Evidently the same incident is alluded to in verse 22 in Canto I where, again, the calamity is attributed to Mahipala’s durnnaya or wrong policy, and the vyasana which the commentator explains as passion for war (yuddha-vyasana).

That the author of RC did not entertain a favourable opinion about Mahipala II is quite clear from the way in which he describes these two incidents, and specially from the words and phrases used in connection with them to describe the king’s character. It is, however, noteworthy, that while the episode of the great rebellion and the part played by the king therein are alluded to merely by way of a casual reference, in short detached phrases, unintelligible without the help of the commentary, the imprisonment of Ramapala is described at length in six verses (I. 32-7). This is an important indication that the author’s judgment of Mahipala was influenced mainly by the latter event. In other words, he considered Mahipala far more blameworthy for his conduct towards Ramapala than for the folly which led to the loss of Varendra. If we remember the open and professed partisanship of Sandhyakaranandi for his hero Ramapala, we should be cautious in accepting, at its face value, both his judgment of the king and his version of the cause and nature of the imprisonment of Ramapala. As regards the other incident which cost Mahipala his life and throne, if the commentator's view is to be accepted, the gravamen of the charge brought by the author against Mahipala consists of his lack of wisdom and good policy (aniti, durnnaya) and an inordinate passion for war (yuddha-vyasana) which led him to undertake a rash military enterprise in spite of the advice of his ministers to the contrary. Apart from these two specific incidents the RC contains only one general reference to the character of Mahipala, in which he is described as ‘rajapravara’ which the commentator explains as nrpatisrestha or excellent king (I. 29). This passing reference, unconnected with any special incident, seems to indicate that Sandhyakaranandi did not fail to appreciate the general merits of Mahipala as a king, although he disapproved of his conduct towards his brothers.

But whatever view we might take of the attitude of the author towards Mahipala, there is absolutely no justification for the following statement made by MM. Sastri:

“Mahipala by his impolitic acts incurred the displeasure of his subjects ..... The Kaivartas were smarting under oppression of the king. Bhima, the son of Rudoka, taking advantage of the popular discontent, led his Kaivarta subjects to rebellion.” (p. 13)

There is not a word in RC to show that Mahipala incurred the displeasure of his subjects by his impolitic acts or that there was a general popular discontent against him. It is an amazing invention to say that “the Kaivartas were smarting under oppression of the king," for the RC does not contain a single word which can even remotely lead to such a belief. It is a travesty of facts to hold that Bhima led his Kaivarta subjects (?) to rebellion. The rebellion was led by a number of feudal vassals and there is no evidence to show that they belonged solely, or even primarily, to the Kaivarta caste. There is again nothing to show that Bhima had anything to do with the rebellion, far less that he led it. Such an assumption seems to be absurd in view of the fact that he was the third king in succession after Divya who occupied the throne of Varendra after the rebellion. There is again nothing in RC to show that during the reign of Mahipala the Kaivartas formed a distinct political entity under Divya or Bhima, so that they might be regarded as the subjects of the latter.

This tissue of misstatements, unsupported by anything in the text of RC, is responsible for a general belief that Mahipala was an oppressive king, and has even led sober historians to misjudge his character and misconstrue the events of his reign. A popular myth has been sedulously built up to the effect that there was a general rising of people which cost Mahipala his life and throne, that it was merely a popular reaction against the oppression and wickedness of the king, and that, far from being rebellious in character, it was an assertion of the people’s right to dethrone a bad and unpopular king and elect a popular chief in his place. In other words, in fighting and killing Mahipala the people of Varendra were inspired by the noblest motive of saving the country from his tyranny and anarchy. Some even proceeded so far as to say that this act was followed by a general election of Divya as the king of Varendra, and a great historian has compared the whole episode with that which led to the election of Gopala, the founder of the Pala dynasty, to the throne of Bengal.1 [ A movement has been set on foot by a section of the Kaivarta or Mahisya community in Bengal to perpetuate the memory of Divya, on the basis of the view-points noted above. They refuse to regard him as a rebel and hold him up as a great hero called to the throne by the people of Varendra to save it from the oppressions of Mahipala. An annual ceremony — Divya-smriti-utsava -- is organized by them and the speeches, made on these occasions by eminent historians like Sir Jadunath Sarkar, Rai Bahadur Rama Prasad Chanda, and Dr. Upendranath Ghoshal [1886-1969; President of The Asiatic Society of Bengal 1963-1964; Author of: Studies in Indian history and culture (1957); A History of Hindu Political Theories: From the Earliest Times to the End of the First Quarter of the Seventeenth Century A.D. (1927); A History of Indian Public Life (1966); Ancient Indian culture in Afghanistan (1928); Contributions to the history of the Hindu revenue system (1929); The agrarian syste in ancient India (1930)] who presided over the function seek to support the popular views. On the other hand attempts have been made to show that these popular views are not supported by the statements in Ramacarita (cf. Bharatavarsa, 1342, pp. 18 ff.).]


This is not the proper place or occasion to criticise these views at length, or to refer to many other important conclusions which have been drawn from MM. Sastri’s sketch of the life and character of Mahipala. But in view of the deep-rooted prejudices and errors which are still current in spite of the exposition of the unwarranted character of MM. Sastri’s interpretation, it is necessary to draw attention to what is really stated in RC about the great rebellion and the part played by Divya. The author of RC did not regard the rising in any other light than a dire calamity which enveloped the kingdom in darkness (I. 22). He describes it as anika dharma-viplava or the unholy or unfortunate civil revolution (1. 24), bhavasya apadam or the calamity of the world, and damaram which the commentator explains as upaplava or disturbance (I. 27). Further, the latter describes it as merely a rebellion of feudal vassals (ananta-samanta-cakra), and not a word is said about its popular character. There is even no indication that the rebels belonged to Varendra or that the encounter between Mahipala and the rebels took place within that province. Such revolts were not uncommon in different parts of the Pala kingdom in those days. Similar revolts placed in power the Kamboja chiefs in Varendra and Radha, and the family of Sudraka in Gaya district.1 [For a detailed discussion of this point and a view of Divya’s rebellion in its true perspective cf. Dr. R C. Majumdar’s article ‘The Revolt of Divvoka against Mahipala II and other revolts in Bengal’ in Dacca University Studies Vol. I, No. 2, pp. 125 ff.]

There is not a word in RC to the effect that Divya2 [The name is written variously in RC as Divya (1. 38), Divvoka (1. 38-39 commentary), and Divoka (I. 31 commentary).] was the leader of a popular rebellion, far less that he was elected as king by the people. As a matter of fact his name is not associated in any way even with the fight between Mahipala and his rebellious chiefs (milit-ananta-samanta-cakra) referred to in Verse I. 31. The RC only tells us that “Ramapala’s beautiful fatherland (Varendri) was occupied by his enemy named Divya, an (officer) sharing royal fortune, who rose to a high position, (but) who took to fraudulent practice as a vow” (I. 38). The account given in RC is not incompatible with the view that Mahipala met with a disastrous defeat in an encounter with some rebellious vassals in or outside Varendra, and Divya took advantage of it to seize the throne for himself. That the author of RC did not entertain any favourable view of the character and policy of Divya is clear from the two adjectives applied to him, viz., dasyu and upadhivrati. The commentator says ‘dasyuna satruna tadbhavapannatvat.’ It is obvious that the commentator means that the term dasyu refers to the enemy (Divya) as he had assumed the character of a dasyu (enemy). As to the other expression upadhivrati, the commentator first explains vrata as ‘something which is undertaken as an imperative duty,’ and then adds ‘chadmani vrati.’ In other words, Divya performed an act on the plea that it was an imperative duty, but this was a merely false pretension. In any case the two words in the text ‘dasyu’ and ‘upadhi’ cannot be taken by any stretch of imagination to imply any good or noble trait in his character.
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 33177
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: The Ramacaritam of Sandhyakaranandin

Postby admin » Fri Apr 30, 2021 1:27 am

Part 2 of 2

What was this act of Divya for which the author also calls him a ‘dasyu’? The answer is furnished by v. I. 29 which tells us that the Kaivarta chief had occupied a major portion of the kingdom after having killed Mahipala. That this Kaivarta chief refers to Divya admits of no doubt. For it is definitely said in the commentary to v. I. 31 that Varendri was seized by Divya, and v. I. 29 states that the kingdom was seized by the Kaivarta chief after having killed Mahipala. That Divya was ruling over the kingdom after the death of Mahipala also follows from v. 15 of the Manhali copper-plate of Madanapala,1 [Gaudalekhamala, p, 152.] which tells us that Ramapala was troubled by the attacks of Divya (or his subjects). For it is quite clear from this that Mahipala had died and Ramapala succeeded to the throne during the rule of Divya. It is impossible, therefore, to accept the contention of Dr. U. N. Ghoshal that it was Bhima, the second king after Divya, who had killed Mahipala.1 [Presidential Address — Divya-smriti-utsava, pp. 19-20.]

The seizure of the throne of Varendra after killing Mahipala is obviously the one outstanding achievement of Divya mentioned in RC. But far from regarding it as an act of patriotism or a noble deed of deliverance of the people from tyranny, the author condemns Divya in an unmistakable manner, and, as if to show the act in its true colour, describes in this connection the murdered king Mahipala as ‘rajapravara’ or excellent king.

But although the view of the author of RC about Divya is clearly expressed, it would be unwise to accept it as gospel truth for reasons stated above. What has been stated in the case of Mahipala II applies also to the case of Divya, as both were adversaries of Ramapala, the hero of the author. In either case, his opinion of their general conduct and character, and his interpretation of their motives and actions are likely to be coloured by an implicit faith in the goodness of Ramapala and the justice of his cause. But while we may hold, therefore, that the whole truth about neither Mahipala nor Divya will be known till fresh independent evidence is forthcoming, we have no right either to misinterpret the plain statements of RC in order to support what we would believe to be true, or to presume that since the author has condemned Mahipala and Divya, they must necessarily, and for that very reason, be regarded as heroes.2 [It is necessary to emphasise this point in view of what has been stated in fn. 1, p. 16 Intro. Annual gatherings are still being held to pay tribute of respect to the great popular hero Divya, and it is proposed to erect a permanent structure to preserve his memory. Nothing of importance about Divya is known to us save what is contained in RC, and we have taken some pains to explain the real significance of the only verses (I. 29, 88) which refer to Divya; for they show how very slender is the foundation on which the imposing memorial structure to Divya is going to be built.]

The course of events which culminated in the murder of Mahipala and the occupation of Varendra by the Kaivarta chief Divya is not very clearly described in RC. The commentary of v. I. 31 refers to the rebellion of the feudal chiefs and the defeat of Mahipala II, but what part, if any, Divya played in it is not definitely stated. The commentator, however, makes the following significant remarks as a preamble to his detailed description of the encounter between Mahipala and the rebel forces:

“The kulaka of eight verses that follow describe how Varendri was seized by Divvoka. By way of reply to the question how an enemy could seize the kingdom of all-powerful Ramapala, an adventure which is comparable to that of plucking out the teeth of a living tiger, the past history is related. [Here follows the account of the encounter between the rebels and Mahipala and the defeat of the latter]. At that time Ramapala was suffering the sorrows of prison life. This will be clear from what follows.”


The six verses that follow (I. 32-37) refer to the circumstances in which Ramapala was thrown into prison and to his sufferings there. The next verse (I. 38), the last of the kulaka of eight verses referred to by the commentator, describes the seizure of Varendra by Divya (or Divvoka).

It is obvious from the above that the victory of the rebels against Mahipala was directly followed by the seizure of Varendra by Divya, and it is not, therefore, unreasonable to conclude that the two events were connected as cause and effect. But it is nowhere said or suggested that Divya was the leader of the rebellion and reaped the fruit of his success by placing himself on the throne, and it is equally possible that he merely took advantage of the disorders following the rebellion to murder the king and secure the throne. The poet’s reference to him as upadhivrati seems to support the latter view. But it is idle to speculate on this problem in the absence of any positive facts known to us. It is clear in any case that shortly after the disastrous defeat of Mahipala in the hands of the rebels, Divya killed Mahipala and occupied Varendra. Of his previous history we merely know that he was a high royal official (I. 38).

RC does not tell us anything about the reign of Divya. We are merely told in v. I. 39, that ‘Varendri, becoming frightened (trasta) became the object of protection of Bhima, the son of Divya’s younger brother Rudoka, who knew how to deal a blow on a vulnerable point (of his enemy), and who was competent to work out any scheme. The commentator tells us that Varendra was ruled successively by Divvoka, Rudoka and Bhima. Taken as a whole, therefore, the verse seems to indicate that Varendra was in a state of disorder during the reigns of Divya and Rudoka, and Bhima, by his ability, placed the government on a stable basis. This view is supported by references to Divya in epigraphic records of the time. In the Belava copper-plate grant of Bhojavarman, Jatavarman claims ‘to have disgraced the strength of the arms of Divya’1 [Inscriptions of Bengal Vol. III, p. 22.] Reference has been made above to the verse in Manhali copper-plate which shows that Divya was engaged in a fight with Ramapala. These struggles perhaps did not enable Divya to devote his attention to the consolidation of the kingdom which was already convulsed by the recent rebellion.

Passing by the shadowy figure of Rudoka we come next to the third king Bhima. As the struggle between Bhima and Ramapala forms the main theme of RC the author naturally speaks a great deal more about him than of his predecessors. As a matter of fact the period preceding this struggle is regarded by the author as merely the background of his story, and the men and events associated with it are very cursorily treated by him. It would be wrong, therefore, to conclude that these men and events, so briefly touched upon by him, are necessarily of less consequence than those dealt with at length in the subsequent part of the work.

MM. Sastri wrote (p. 13) that Bhima ‘built a Damara, a suburban city close to the capital of the Pala empire’. The only foundation for this misstatement is the expression wrongly read by him as damaram-upapuram etc’ in the commentary to v. I. 27. The expression, as correctly read, viz ‘damaram-upaplavam,’ shows that there is no reference to any city, far less to any capital city founded by Bhima, as Mr. R. D. Banerji imagined.1 [Op. cit., p. 291.]

The sack of Ḍamara, the enemy's capital.

The adjective Upapura is no doubt applied slightingly because it happened to be the capital of the enemy. Bhīma remained a captive and was placed in charge of a certain Vittapāla.[43] The scattered forces of Bhīma were rallied by one of his friends named Hari. In the ensuing battle Rāmapāla's son contested every inch of ground and at last succeeded in defeating the Kaivarttas. Hari was, at last, deprived of his forces, captured and executed with Bhīma.

-- The Pālas of Bengal, by Rakhaldas Bandyopadhyay [aka R. D. Banerji, M.A., Indian Museum, Calcutta]


Though the details of Bhima’s reign are not given, seven verses (II. 21-27) are devoted to a description of his good policy and ideal character, and of the peace, prosperity and good government established by him in Varendra. Such a flattering account from enemy’s side certainly justifies the assumption that Bhima was a king of unusual ability, and had rescued Varendra from the chaos and confusion which must have set in after the late revolution. The author of RC, though a devoted partisan of Ramapala, had the candour and generosity to admit that Bhima “had never transgressed the bounds (of propriety),” and that by getting him as king “the whole world got prosperity in plenty, and the earth also found peace” (II. 24). It is not, however, easy to reconcile all this with his statement that Varendra was oppressed with cruel taxation (III. 27) before Ramapala’s conquest, and therefore, presumably, in the reign of Bhima.

While Bhima was busy restoring the peace and prosperity of Varendra, preparations were going on beyond his frontier which ultimately overwhelmed him and destroyed the fortunes of his family.

It has been noted above that Ramapala and his elder brother Surapala were both in prison when Mahipala was defeated by the rebellious chiefs. What became of them after this catastrophe is not expressly stated. MM. Sastri’s statement that “they were rescued by their friends” (p. 18), presumably even before the revolution, is not borne out by RC. It is clear, however, that somehow or other they managed to escape and leave Varendra. Although there is no subsequent reference to Surapala in RC it is clear from v. 14 of the Manhali copper-plate of Madanapala that Surapala ascended the throne after the death of Mahipala II. Of the events of his reign we know nothing. But the silence of RC about Surapala’s later history certainly does not justify, in any way, the assumption made by Mr. R. D. Banerji that he was murdered by Ramapala. 1 [Op. cit, p. 280.]

The mention of Śūrapāla's accession to the throne or the recognition of his chiefship in the Pāla dominions, may have been omitted by Sandhyākaranandi, either through carelessness, or as not being relevant to his subject. It may also be possible that Śūrapāla was Rāmapāla's rival for the throne, and though he had succeeded temporarily he was overthrown in the long run and perhaps murdered at the instigation of his younger brother.

-- The Pālas of Bengal, by Rakhaldas Bandyopadhyay [aka R. D. Banerji, M.A., Indian Museum, Calcutta]


The author of RC, as noted above, confined his narrative only to the incidents that had a bearing upon his main theme, viz., the struggle between Bhima and Ramapala and the recovery of Varendra by the latter. All that we may reasonably infer, therefore, is that Surapala played no part in the great task, which devolved, after his death, upon his younger brother.

Even after the usurpation of the throne of Varendra bv Divya, Ramapala (and presumably also his elder brother Surapala) ruled over the remaining part of the Pala kingdom which probably included at that time parts of Magadha (S. Bihar), Radha, (W. Bengal) and Vanga (Southern and Eastern Bengal). His rule over Magadha is proved by the Tetrawan Inscription2 [J. A. S. B., N. S. Vol. IV, p. 109.] dated in his second regnal year, and the colophon of a manuscript copied in Nalanda in his fifteenth regnal year.3 [Catalogue Bodleian Library, Vol. II, p. 250, No. 1428.] The fact that the chiefs of Radha are all referred to as his samantas seems to indicate that his suzerainty was nominally recognised there, at least at the beginning. In a medical treatise called Sabdapradipa,4 [Eggeling— India Library Catalogue, Part V, pp. 974 ff.] the author’s father is said to have been the court-physician to Ramapala, king of Vanga, his great-grandfather having acted in the same capacity to king Govindacandra. There can be hardly any doubt that this Ramapala is the well-known Pala king, and Govindacandra, the king of Vangaladesa defeated by Rajendra Cola. The epithet Vangesvara seems to refer to the period when Ramapala had not yet recovered Varendra, and it is not unlikely that at some time his kingdom was practically confined to Vanga, or a part of it.5 [It will be seen later that Bhimayasas, one of the vassal chiefs that helped Ramapala in his expedition against Bhima, is called king of Magadha. This shows that Ramapala did no longer exercise any effective sovereignty there. The same thing was also true of Radha or at least the greater part of it as Ramapala had to buy the support of the chiefs there by offer of land and money. Mr. R. D. Banerji's contention that the dominions of Ramapala at the time of his coronation were confined to the delta between the Bhagirathi and the Padma (op. cit., p. 280) cannot be reconciled with the Tetrawan Image Inscription referred to above. Although Ramapala is called Lord of Vanga, it is doubtful if Eastern Bengal formed part of his dominions before the reconquest of Varendra, for the Varmans probably were ruling there with Vikramapura as their capital. We say, probably because Bhojavarman is the only Varman king who is definitely known to have ruled in Vikramapur. His father Samalavarman and grandfather Jatavarman were also independent kings, but we have no definite information about the locality where they ruled. The natural presumption, of course, is that they, too, ruled in Vikramapur, and in that case, as Jatavarman was a contemporary of Divya, Eastern Bengal must have been outside the dominions of Ramapala, which would then be limited to South Bengal. The author of Sabdapradipa, whose father served Ramapala, was himself the court-physician of a king Bhimapala, ruler of Padi.
MM. Sastri identifies him with the Kaivarta king Bhima (RC Introd. p. 15). This does not seem probable. It is more likely that Bhimapala either belonged to the family of Pala rulers in S. Bengal whose existence has been revealed by the Sundarban copper-plate grant, dated 1196 A.D. (I. H. Q., Vol. X, p. 321) or is to be identified with Bhimayasas, king of Pithi, one of the chiefs who helped Ramapala. In that case Padi may be regarded as a mistake for Pithi.]


Ramapala could hardly reconcile himself to the loss of Varendra. As the poet so tersely puts it, “he did not care for the lordship of the earth, having been deprived of his beloved land (Varendri) and consumed by the fire of his heavy sorrow” (I. 41). He, however, felt himself powerless to adopt any effective means to recover Varendra (I. 40). But then some new danger arose, and Ramapala, after consultation with his sons and ministers, resolved on firm and prompt action (I. 42). The exact nature of this new danger is not disclosed in RC, but perhaps v. 15 of the Manhali copper-plate throws some light on this. It tells us that Ramapala, though provoked and shaken (in mind) by the excessive disturbances caused by the subjects of Divya, remained patient. It would thus appear that Divya, not content with what he had already achieved by killing Mahipala, carried on campaigns against Ramapala and was largely successful. It was probably this new danger of losing even the remaining part of his kingdom that forced Ramapala to activity.

In his sheer despair Ramapala sought for help in all possible quarters. The proud inheritor of the throne of Dharmapala and Devapala literally begged from door to door with a view to enlisting the sympathy and support of the powerful chiefs who were formerly, and many of whom perhaps still nominally, his vassal chiefs. “The land belonging to numerous kings and inhabited by different, great, and fierce forest chiefs was travelled over with difficulty” by Ramapala (I. 43). At last his efforts proved successful. By a lavish offer of land and enormous wealth he gained over to his side a number of powerful chiefs who possessed well-equipped forces (I. 45).

During the war aeroplanes on their way from India to China often lost their way. This is probably the most difficult air-route in the world, as the passage of the Himalayas puts a heavy strain on the skill and experience of the pilot who, once he has lost his bearings, finds it very difficult to right himself owing to the inadequacy of the maps of Tibet.

One night the droning of motors was heard over the Holy City and caused general alarm. Two days later news came from Samye that five Americans had landed there in parachutes. The Government invited them to come to Lhasa on their way back to India. The airmen must have been greatly astonished at being received in tents some way out of the city, and offered a hearty welcome with butter-tea and scarves. We were told in Lhasa that they had lost their bearings completely and that the wings of their plane had grazed the snow slopes of the Nyenchenthanglha. After this they had turned back, but finding that they had too little fuel to reach India they decided to scrap their plane and jump. Except for a sprained ankle or two and a broken arm they came down safely. After a short stay in Lhasa, they were convoyed by the Government to the Indian frontier, riding horses and as comfortable as one can be on trek in Tibet.

The crews of other American planes which came down in Tibet during the war were not so lucky. In Eastern Tibet the remains of two crashed planes were found; the members of the crews had all been killed. Another plane must have crashed south of the Himalayas in a province whose inhabitants are savage jungle folk. These people are not Buddhists, but naked savages reputed to use poisoned arrows. From time to time they come out of their forests to exchange skins and musk for salt and beads. On one of these occasions they offered objects which could only have come from an American aeroplane. Nothing more was ever heard of this disaster. I would have liked to go in search of the site of the accident, but the distance was too great.

-- Seven Years in Tibet, by Heinrich Harrer


The names of these chiefs are given in vv. II. 5, 6, 8. But due to the exigencies of metre and the double meaning of each verse, the names are given in such a contracted form, that they would not have been intelligible to us, but for the detailed explanation given in the commentary, which also adds the name of the locality ruled over by each of these chiefs. This detailed list of the independent or semi-independent chiefs of Bengal may be regarded as the most important historical information contained in RC. It portrays in a vivid manner the political dismemberment of Bengal caused by the decline of the power and authority of the Palas.

As the description of the allied chiefs is given only in the commentary, of which no English translation is given, a short historical account of them may be given here for the convenience of the readers.


Foremost among Ramapala’s allies was his maternal uncle Mathana, better known as Mahana, the Rastrakuta chief who joined Ramapala with his two sons, Mahamandalika Kanharadeva and Suvarnadeva, and his brother’s son Mahapratihara Sivaraja. Mathana had already established his fame by defeating Devaraksita, king of Pithi. This statement in RC is fully supported by the following passage of the Saranath inscription. “In the Gauda country there was a peerless warrior, the Anga king Mahana, the venerable maternal uncle of kings. He conquered Devaraksita in war and maintained the glory of Ramapala, which rose in splendour because the obstruction caused by his foes was removed.”1 [Ep. Ind. Vol. IX, p. 386 [Actually pp. 320-326].]

(V.7.) In the Gauda country there was a peerless warrior, with his quiver,3 [The meaning of kandapatika is uncertain. The word is usually translated ‘screen.” But this meaning [lines missing]] this incomparable diadem of kshatriyas, the Anga king Mahana, the venerable maternal uncle of kings. He conquered Devarakshita in war and maintained the glory of Ramapala, which rose in splendor because the obstruction caused by his foes was removed.

-- No. 51 – Sarnath Inscription of Kumaradevi, by Sten Konow, Epigraphia Indica, 1907-8


This inscription further informs us that after defeating Devaraksita Mahana gave his daughter to him in marriage, and presumably an alliance was thus established between the two kingdoms which stood Ramapala in good stead. For at the head of the list of allied feudal chiefs stands the name of Bhimayasas, the king of Pithi and lord of Magadha (Magadhadhipati), who had overthrown the army of the king of Kanauj. The exact location of Pithi is not known, but it was certainly in Bihar,1 [Cf. Jainbigha Ins. J. B. O. R. S., Vol. IV, pp. 366-71.] and its ruler was undoubtedly a powerful one. Unfortunately the relation between Devaraksita and Bhimayasas is not known.

Of the other allied chiefs that joined Ramapala in his expedition against Varendra, RC mentions only the following:

1. Viraguna — He was king of Kotatavi in the south. Kota is perhaps to be located in the district of Cuttack or in its neighbourhood in Orissa on the strength of a passage in Ain-i-Akbari, which refers to Mahal Kot-des with three forts, under Sarkar Katak in Subah Orissa.2 [Jarret — Ain-i-Akbarl, Vol. II, p. 144.]

2. Jayasimha— He was king of Dandabhukti, and defeated Karnakesari, king of Utkala. Dandabhukti comprised the southern and south-western parts of the Midnapore district.

3. Vikramaraja — Ruler of Bala-Balabhi, which included the village Devagrama.3 [MM. Sastri identifies Bala-Balabhi with Bagdi (p. 14), but there is no evidence in support of it.]

4. Laksmisura — He is described as lord of Apara-Mandara, and head of the group of feudal chiefs of the forest (atavika-samanta-cudamani). Mandara has been identified with Sarkar Mandaran of the Ain-i-Akbari whose head-quarters Garh-Mandaran is now represented by Bhitargarh, 8 miles to the west of Arambagh in the Hooghly district.1 [R. D. Eanerji — Orissa, p. 250.]

Sarkar Mandaran - It was a long straggling strip of territory running from Birbhum in the north to the junction of the Hugli and Hupnarayan rivers in the south.

-- Bengal in the reign of Aurangzib (1658-1707), Thesis submitted for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy at the University of London, by Anjali Basu


5. Surapala—Ruler of Kujavati, which may be identified with the locality of that name about 14 miles north of Nayadumka.2 [Birabhumer Itihasa by Sri-Gaurihar Mitra, p. 59.]

6. Rudrasikhara — Ruler of Tailakampa, which has been identified with Telkupi in the Manbhum district. The region is still known as Sikharabhum, evidently after the surname Sikhara of the royal family.3 [Ibid.]

7. Bhaskara or Mayagalasimha, king of Ucchala.4 [This has been located in the Birbhum district, but the evidence is hardly satisfactory (R. D. Banerji — Banglar Itihasa pp. 289-90).]

8. Pratapasimha — King of Dhekkarlya which has been identified with Dhekuri near Katwa in the Burdwan district. The Ramganj copper-plate proves that Dhekkari was set up as an independent state by Isvaraghosa, probably at the time when revolution broke out against Mahipala.5 [N. G. Majumder— Ins. of Bengal Vol. Ill, p. 149.]

9. Narasimharjuna — Lord of Kayangala-mandala, which has been identified with Kankjole, south of Rajmahal.

10. Caridarjuna of Samkatagrama, which cannot be identified.

11. Vijayaraja of Nidravali — It has been suggested that he is identical with Vijayasena of the Sena family who was originally settled in Radha and ultimately established his sovereignty all over Bengal.6 [Dr. H. C. Raychaudhury — Studies in Indian Antiquities, p, 158.] But there is no definite evidence in support of this identification. On the other hand Nidravali being one of the ‘ganis’ of Varendra Brahmanas, it was most probably situated in North Bengal.

12. Dvorapavardhana, ruler of Kausambi, which is probably now represented by the Pargana Tappe Kusumbi in the Bogra district. There is also a village called Kusumba in the same district.1 [Mr. R. D. Banerji identifies it with Kusumba in the Rajshahi district (op. cit., p. 290).]

13. Soma of Paduvanva not identified.2 [Paduvanva may be the origin of the name Pabna as MM. Sastri suggests (p. 14), but there is no evidence in support of it, except the similarity of the two names.]

In addition to Mahapa, Bhimayasas and the thirteen rulers mentioned above, Ramapala was joined by other chiefs whose names are not given (II. 6). An analysis of the list shows that, leaving aside the localities whose identifications are unknown or doubtful, almost all the allies of Ramapala belonged to South Bihar, South-west Bengal, and the border-land between Bengal and Orissa. The probable exceptions are Nos. 11, 12 and 13 above whose territories may have been in Varendra, though No. 11 may not impossibly have belonged to Radha.

If the identification of Kausambi with Kusumbi in either Rajshahi or Bogra be accepted, we must hold that Ramapala’s diplomacy succeeded in attaching isolated chiefs, even of Varendra, to his side. This must have proved disastrous to the cause of Bhima, as he was now liable to attack from within. Besides, it proves that Varendra did not solidly stand by him and there was disruption within the newly founded kingdom.

Being joined by the large and well-equipped forces of the confederate chiefs, consisting of cavalry, elephants, fleet of boats and infantry, king Ramapala felt strong enough to make an attempt towards the recovery of Varendra. He despatched a force under Mahapratihara Sivaraja, the nephew of Mathana, who crossed the Ganges and devastated Varendra (I. 47-49). There is no reference to any pitched battle, but presumably the frontier guards of Bhima were defeated, and the way was made clear for the crossing of the river by the entire force (I. 50).

As soon as Sivaraja reported to Ramapala that his army had occupied the frontier posts, the entire force of Ramapala crossed the Ganges by means of a flotilla of boats, and safely reached the "northern bank” (II. 9-11). The express reference in RC to the "northern bank” seems to show that Ramapala proceeded from his base in southern Bengal, and this supports the view, mentioned above, that at the time of this expedition southern Bengal was the chief stronghold of Ramapala’s power.

After Ramapala had crossed the Ganges with his huge army, Bhima opposed him, and a pitched battle took place.
The tumultuous battle, which is described in nine verses (II. 12-20), was conducted with equal vigour and ferocity on both sides. Both Bhima and Ramapala took a very active part in it, and kept close to each other (II. 14). But ‘by an evil turn of destiny’ Bhima, seated on his elephant, was taken prisoner (II. 17, 20). This decided the fate of the battle. Bhima’s army fled, and his camp was plundered by the ‘unrestrained soldiers’ of Ramapala (II. 29-80). The day was irretrievably lost, and the whole kingdom lay prostrate before the victorious Ramapala who sent messages to his fatherland, and distributed jewels and treasures among his successful followers (II. 28). The poet gives a pathetic description of Bhima, the wailings of his army, and the ruthless plunder of his kingdom by the hostile forces (II. 30-34). But Ramapala showed great consideration towards his captured adversary. He himself helped Bhima to get down from the elephant (II. 28) and placed the illustrious prisoner in charge of his son Vittapala (II. 36), who showed all hospitality and kindness to the fallen foe (II. 36).

The portion of the text describing the subsequent events is difficult to understand in the absence of the old and authentic commentary which abruptly ends here in the single manuscript available to us. Our construction of what followed is, therefore, based on our own interpretation of the verses. The verse (II. 37) which refers to the hospitality of Vittapala to Bhima also darkly hints that the royal captive did some act by eluding the vigilance of his enemies, which caused rejoicings to arka-bhu. This word is not clear and the only possible interpretation we can offer is to take it as ‘brother’s son’. Perhaps Bhima organised some sort of resistance to Ramapala by sending secretly from his prison messages to his allies. For, in the next verse (II. 38) we are told that his friend Hari rallied his forces and blockaded those of Ramapala. The word ‘arka-bhu' might refer to Hari and he may be the brother’s son of Bhima; but this is a pure conjecture for the present, and other possible identifications of Hari will be discussed later.

Hari put up a valiant fight, and at first scored some successes (II. 38 ff). But Ramapala’s son, who was put in charge of the fight, “exhausted the golden pitchers by his war-time gifts” (II. 43), and evidently managed to create some discord between Hari and Bhima’s followers which caused obstruction to each other (II. 41). Finally Hari was won over, and this sealed the fate of Bhima’s army which, it is said in II. 39, was “made to swell by ill-equipped soldiers.”

After having crushed this rising of the enemies Ramapala took a terrible vengeance upon Bhima. Vittapala led Bhima to the place of execution, where important members of his family were executed before his very eyes. Then Bhima himself was killed by means of a “multitude of arrows” (II. 45-49). Thus ended the life of Bhima and the rebellion of Varendra.

The whole episode shows what little part was played by popular sentiment and public opinion in the origin and determination of the fate of civil wars in those days.
In spite of the good administration and presumed popularity of Bhima, he fared no better than Mahipala II.

MM. Sastri seems to have misunderstood the passage describing the conclusion of the war. Thus he writes: “Hari at last found himself powerless, was captured, and led to the place of execution. Bhima, too, seems to have been put to the sword” (p. 14). Far from being executed, Hari was ‘established in a position of great influence’ by Ramapala after the battle was over (III. 32). Evidence of further cordial relations between Ramapala and Hari is furnished by verses III. 39-40 which tell us that Ramapala and Hari met together and shone for a long time in each other’s close embrace in the palace” at Ramavati. Probably the same cordiality existed also between Hari and Madanapala (IV. 37, 40).

The subsequent treatment to Hari justifies the inference made above, that Hari was won over by Ramapala or his son Vittapala by offer of money, and this defection finally shattered the resistance offered by Bhima’s partisans.

The scattered references to Hari leave no doubt that he became a distinguished person of great importance and was held in great love and esteem by the Pala kings.

After the final collapse of the forces of Bhima, Ramapala took possession of his immense riches, and “occupied after a long time the dearest land of Varendri” (III. I). He restored peace and order in Varendra (III. 27) and founded a new city there called Ramavati. The poet gives a glowing account of Varendra, which was also his own fatherland, in twenty-seven verses (III. 2-28), and refers to Ramavati in the next twelve verses (III. 29-40). MM. Sastri took all these verses to refer to Ramavati and hence remarked that Ramapala founded a city named Ramavati at the confluence of the Ganges and the Ivaratoya. As a matter of fact it was Varendra and not Ramavati which is referred to by the author as situated between these two rivers. MM. Sastri’s interpretation has misled many scholars to look for the city of Ramavati at the confluence of the Ganges and the Karatoya for which there is no warrant in the text itself. Ramavati is most likely to be identified with Ramauti, mentioned in Ain-i-Akbari as a fiscal unit (circle) in the Sarkar of Lakhnauti.1 [Jarrett, Vol. II, p. 131.] It is not necessary here to refer to the beautiful description of Varendra and Ramavati beyond emphasising the fact that it is perhaps the only literary account that we possess of the physical features, including flora and fauna, of Bengal and the life of its people during the Hindu period. Attention may, however, be specially drawn to verse 24 which alludes to the political relation of the Pala kingdom with other Indian States. Bereft of poetic imagery it seems to imply that the Pala kingdom now again vied in glory and power with those of Lata and Kuntala; further, it overpowered Anga, prevented the accession of strength or power to Madhyadesa, and checked the attempts of Karnata to extend her influence over Bengal. The reference to Karnata is important as we know that within a short period chiefs of Karnata origin actually conquered Bengal. It is obvious, therefore, that signs were already visible of their attempts in this direction. The reference to Madhyadesa indicates that it was the policy of the Palas to check the Gahadavalas who had recently established their power at Kanauj, so that they may not prove dangerous rivals. This is corroborated by the fact, noted above, that Bhimayasas, one of the feudal chiefs of Ramapala had defeated the king of Kanyakubja. Anga must have been brought under the control of the Palas before Ramapala went out to fight Bhima, for at the time of this expedition Mahana, his maternal uncle and great supporter, was the ruler over this kingdom, and continued as an intimate ally till the end of Ramapala’s reign. Probably Ahga was wrested from the hands of Jatavarman who claims to have established his influence there.1 [Belava copper-plate of Bhojavarman v. 8. (Ins. of Bengal Vol. Ill by N. G. Majumdar, p. 20.)]

In addition to what is stated in v. 24 other political persons and events are referred to in course of the description of Varendra, by way of veiled allusions; but it is now impossible to understand their full import in the absence of a contemporary commentary. Thus mention is made of several potentates in verses 2-4 viz., Srihetvisvara, Candesvara, Ksemesvara, and Skanda, but we do not know who they were and in what connection they are referred to. MM. Sastri's contention that the advice of the first three of these kings was followed by Ramapala in selecting the site of the city of Ramavati is a pure guess, and obviously incorrect, as the verses in question have nothing to do with that city.

After having consolidated his power at Varendra Ramapala turned his attention to the conquest of neighbouring dominions. Here, again, the allusions are obscure and not always fully intelligible. Ramapala extirpated the Nagas and thereby protected a king of the Naka dynasty (III. 43).



A Varman king of Eastern country sought his own safety by conciliating Ramapala with the offer of his chariots and elephant force (III. 44 ).1 [This king was probably either Bhojavarman or Harivarman both of whom are known from their copper-plate grants to have ruled with Vikramapur as their capital. It is very tempting to identify Harivarman with Hari, an important but a somewhat mysterious figure in RC, but no definite opinion can be hazarded on this point.] Ramapala showed favour to the vanquished king of Utkala and rescued the whole world from the terror of Kalinga (III. 45). Kamarupa was conquered by an allied king to whom Ramapala showed great honour (II. 47). MM. Sastri’s view that Mayana was the name of this conqueror (p. 15) is due to his error in reading the compound word “mahimanam = apa na=nrpo” as “mahimana-mayana- nrpa.” It is impossible to ascertain the names of, or say anything definite about, the various kings referred to in the above verses. All that we can safely conclude is that Ramapala succeeded in re-asserting the supremacy of the Palas over wide dominions, and that his kingdom extended to Assam in the east and Orissa in the south. His campaign in Orissa probably indicates that his authority was fully established over western Bengal. He may thus be said to have ruled over Bengal, Bihar, Orissa and Assam, or at least over major portions of these provinces.

Even amid the engrossment of foreign campaigns Ramapala found time to organise the administration (IV. 1), and undertake “great works of public utility” (III. 42). In his old age he entrusted the cares of government to his son Rajyapala (IV. 1, 7), who maintained good government and secured internal order by acting under his instructions (IV. 3-4).

The end of Ramapala was tragic. News reached him while he was staying at Monghyr (Mudgiri) that his maternal uncle Mathana died at Adrisutapura by drowning himself in the river, on account of some bodily troubles from which he was suffering. Ramapala resolved to follow in the footsteps of Mathana, and died in a similar way (IV. 8-10). Thus ended a great career whose achievements revived the lost glory of the Palas and inspired a Bengali poet to write an historical epic which has attained immortal fame.

The name of the poem Ramacarita seems to indicate that originally the poet intended to sing only the praises of Ramapala. But evidently his plan was changed as three more kings ascended the throne before he could complete or publish his book. So the poet continued the story even after the death of Ramapala. Devoting a single verse to each of the reigns of Kumarapala (IV. 11) and Gopala (i.e. Gopala III) (IV. 12), he describes in the remaining 36 verses the life and reign of Madanapala, the son of Ramapala, who succeeded his nephew Gopala on the throne. Sandhyakaranandi concludes his book with the prayer that Madanapala might long rule over the kingdom. This shows that he finished his great poem while Madanapala was still on the throne.

Although most of the verses in this concluding portion contain merely vague and general praises of Madanapala, there are some allusions to important political events, which cannot, however, be properly understood. The verse referring to the reign of Gopala (IV. 12), for example, seems to contain some dark hints about his premature and unnatural death, but we are unable to solve the mystery. Very great prominence is, again, given to an allied king Candra, who is described in five verses (IV. 16-20) and was one of the most reliable friends of the king. This king Candra is probably to be identified with the son of Suvarpadeva and grandson of Mahana, ruler of Anga.1 [Cf. I. H. Q„ Vol. V, pp. 35 ff. The view originally propounded by MM. II. P. Sastri (p. 16), and subsequently followed by Mr. R. D. Banerji and others, that this king Candra was the Gahadavala ruler of Kanauj is untenable, as according to the scheme of chronology, now generally adopted, Madanapala ascended the throne after the latter’s death. The expression "suvarnajatena Candrena" might be taken to refer to the king Trailokyacandra, son of Suvarnacandra, but the generally accepted view of the chronology of the Candra kings of East Bengal stands in the way of this identification.] Some calamities befalling the kingdom are vaguely alluded to in v. IV. 23 which says that Madanapala “made alliance with a great king of godly character, when he (Madanapala) found his kingdom thrown into great agitation” (IV. 23). Evidently some foreign invasion like that of Vijayasena is alluded to, and the great allied king may be the Gahadavala ruler of Kanauj. But all these are purely conjectural. A pitched battle on the Kalindi river is alluded to in v. IV. 27. 1 [It is difficult to accept the conclusion drawn by MM. H. P. Sastri from this verse that the Bengal army fought a battle against the enemies of Kanauj on the banks of the Yamuna”. (p. 16).] A king or chief named Hari is mentioned (IV. 37, 40) who may or may not be identical with the ‘friend of Bhima’ who had gone over to Ramapala. Again it is said that Madanapala uprooted a king named Govardhana. A king of this name is known to have been defeated by Jatavarman,2 [Belava copper-plate Grant (Ins. of Bengal Vol. III by N. G. Majumdar, p. 22).] but it is very difficult to identify the two, as Jatavarman was the husband of the sister of Madanapala’s grandmother.

It is unnecessary here to speculate on these historical references which cannot be cleared up until either the missing portion of the commentary is discovered, or some other fresh evidence is forthcoming. We conclude this Introduction with the hope that such evidences might enable future historians to derive more information from Ramacarita than we have been able to do.
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 33177
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: The Ramacaritam of Sandhyakaranandin

Postby admin » Sat May 15, 2021 10:12 am

Canto I: "Rama in Action"

V. 1. A. I salute that (Mahesvara), the god having the digit of the moon as his decoration, to whose dark neck Beauty resorts, who carries the (Sesa) serpent in his arm, and who wears a garland of skulls hanging from his matted hairs.

B. I salute Krsna, whose neck the goddess Sri (Laksmi) embraces, who lifts up by his hand the mountain (Govardhana), who has (the locks of hair on) his head entwined with hair-band and who wears as (personal) decorations a flute (of bamboo) and peacock-tails.

V. 2. A. May that Hara, along with (his consort Gauri), the goddess born of the cool mountain (the Himalaya), who keeps the Bull under control of his feet, bestow happiness on you; — (Hara) by whom the army of the gods was at first put to hardship by his burning of the Love-god (lit, the god possessing arrows of uneven number i.e. five)!

B. May that god Vasudeva, the lord of Ma (Laksmi), the slayer of Kamsa, whose (three) strides overpowered Bali, bestow happiness on you;— (Vasudeva) by whom the cruel army of the demons was benefited by his immediately striking them with his mace!

V. 3. A. May the sun, who causes blooming beauty to lotuses, (or who causes the goddess Kamalalaya to manifest herself in lotuses), bestow welfare on you; — (the god) into whom enters the moon at its complete decline (i.e. on the amabasya day), by collecting together its (own) light!

B. May the (Ocean), the lord of waters, who gave birth to Laksmi, bestow welfare on you; — (the sea-god) into whose body enters (for rest) the god Visnu (=Vidhu) at the time of the great dissolution (of the universe) by collecting together (within Himself) all the worlds!  

V. 4. A. There was the King, named Iksvaku, the light of his (Sun’s) race, who was Dharma incarnate, (and) whose pure fame, having crossed the sea, also shone over the earth.

B. There was the valiant king, named Dharma (=Dharmapala), the light of his (Samudra’s) race, whose fleet of stone boats appeared splendid, when it crossed the sea (floating) like bitter gourds, (and) whose pure fame also became resplendent after having crossed the sea.

V. 5. A. By him (Iksvaku), who possessed the strength of a mountain (or of Visnu, the lord of Laksmi), who was the ornament of the race of kings, who was the master of fortunes, and who had the Earth for his wife (or chief consort), was borne (the burden of) the earth, as far as the seas.

B. By him (Dharmapala), the ornament of the family of the Palas, who possessed the strength of a mountain (or of the Primaeval Boar), who was the master of fortunes and who had the Earth for his wife (or chief consort), was borne (the burden of) the earth, as far as the seas.

V. 6. (A-B) In the family of this king (Iksvaku, as well as Dharmapala) who was the supporter of the earth, were born kings who, by their fame as well as by (or, as by) the river of the gods (Ganga), became themselves pure (lit. white), crossed the oceans and sanctified the three worlds.

V. 7. (A-B) These kings (both of the Iksvaku and Pala dynasties) bore (the burden of) the earth, and were ever inclined to raise the qualified persons (who were ornaments) to their masters and lower those who, by their own nature, accumulated vices and ruined their own families; (they also) supported the heaven (by means of sacrifices).

N.B. Another interpretation of the is verse possible: — These kings (themselves) supported the earth by dragging up the serpent-lord to serve as a decoration for Siva, and the heaven by lowering down Indra whose arm was strengthened by his thunderbolt.  

V. 8. A. In that family, a mine of jewels (i.e. eminent personages), it is reported, was born king Dasaratha, whose house was resorted to by Hari (= Rama), who reared (the latter’s) person, (or, whose valour was adored by Indra for co-operation in battle; or, who offers protection to those who surrender arms in battle), and before whom other kings bowed down.

B. Then, in that dynasty, a mine of jewels (i.e. prominent rulers), it is reported, was born, king Vigrahapala (III), whose valour was even deemed superior to his own by the lion, and by whom the whole host of other kings was humbled down.

N.B. By the rhetorical figure stesopama -- a third meaning of the verse may be arrived at: — In that receptacle of waters (i.e. the ocean), the abode of jewels, was born the moon, whose body was marked by a hare, who enlivens the bodiless god (= Cupid) (by his rise), and whose car surpassed the height of lines of mountains.

V. 9. A. That (king, Dasaratha), by whose co-operation the hand of the gods (lit. enemies of demons) had not to feel fatigued and by whom Karna was surpassed on account of his unexpected (or undelayed) charities, ruled over the earth with the wealth of his youth and became a companion of Indra (Vrsan).

B. That (king, Vigrahapala III), by whom Karna (king of Dahala), though vanquished in battle, was protected by his valour, whose numerous gifts of various kinds were uninterrupted, and who was (ever) a follower of Dharma, ruled over the earth in the company of (his consort, named) Yauvanasri.

V. 10-11 A. Then (four) sons were born to him (Dasaratha), viz, Rama, who ruled over the earth, protected the gods, was an incarnation of Purusottama (Hari), whose appearance (in human form) was made possible by the glowing Rsyasrnga (sage) (performing a sacrifice), and who owed his birth to a portion of cara (sacrificial offering); (and) Bharata, the only competent person to offer protection to the world, whose spirit, like a great fire, (burst forth) just in time, and (the third) Laksmana; and (the fourth) whose appellation was Satrughna.

B. Then (three) sons were born to him (Vigrahapala III), viz, Mahipala (II), Surapala, and the eminent person Rama (= Ramapala), whose form was resplendent, charming and rich in majesty, who was endowed with good fortune, the only competent person to offer protection to the world, great by timely use of power, never given to greed, of auspicious signs, and who possessed all marks indicative of victory over enemies.

V. 12. A. Like the Visnu (Vamana) who eclipsed the glory of Bali, amongst the chief gods, Brahma (ka) and others, Rama, the eldest amongst those (four) sons, shone as the mighty rescuer of the earth sunk under the weight (of oppression) of the Lord of Lanka (Ravana).

B. Like the Visnu (Vamana) who put an end to the glory of Bali, amongst the chief gods, Brahma (ka) and others, Rama (Ramapala) the worthiest amongst those (three) sons, shone as one quite competent to deliver with ease the earth seized (by the enemy [or, the earth smarting under the oppression of that bad king (of the Kaivartas)], so capable he was.

N. B. The figure npama in [x] admits of two other interpretations:— (i) Just as the Sesa amongst serpents, residing in the nether world assigned to Bali, keeps uplifted the earth or, (ii) Just as the god Varaha raised up the earth wholly sunk under the ocean (lit. the lord of waters) etc.

V. 13. A. Having obtained whom (Rama), his wise mother, Kosala, drew him to her arms thrilled (with joy) and appeared brilliant, (because this son was known to her as an incarnation of Vasudeva) — one in many respects sinless, riding the large bird (Garuda) and supporting all people (or, having obtained him, the city of Kosala appeared beautiful).

B. After having approached whom (Ramapala), the goddess of Royalty (Ma) helped him to expand (his resources) on the acquisition of treasury, (as he was found) to possess a large troop of elephants, a large cavalry, and an infantry, and to be conversant with political principles, having all the constituents of sovereignty fully developed.  

V 14. A-B This person (Rama, as well as Ramapala) had never any sin or misery, crippled the power of those kings who acted as impediments to (the interests of) the whole world, had his palms wet in waters mixed with kusa grass and tila seeds, while engaged in acts of charities and had rendered his enemies powerless.

N.B. This verse contains the figure virodha, viz, contradiction which is merely verbal and is explained away by second meanings attached to the epithets which, in one case, apply to Indra, and in the other, to Rama as well as Ramapala thus: - (1) nakasya bharta— (i) the ruler or supporter of heaven, (ii) not possessing sin or misery; (2) visva° tat tarah bhindan— (i) the clipper of the famous speed of winged mountains hostile to the all, (ii) destroying the power of kings hostile to the (interest of) the whole world; (3) dana...toyah-(i) one by whom kusa, tila and water were placed on the palms of the demonesses (i.e. who brought about their widowhood), (ii) one who had in his hands kusa, tila and water, while engaged in acts of (pious) charites; abalarih (i) (yet) not Balari, i.e. Indra (the enemy of Bala, the demon), (ii) one whose enemies were powerless.  

V. 15. A-B. Who (Rama, as well as Rampala), — although he held no thunderbolt in his hand, killed no Bala, was no king of the gods, performed not many a sacrifice, could neither be called Gotrabhid nor Pakasasana (and thus had no characteristics of Indra) — was (yet) like Sunasira (Indra) himself.

N.B. Bereft of the apparent virodha the epithets may mean thus: — Who had his arms unassailable (in gifts or battles), his strength (or army) unbroken, no craziness (in mind), no feeling of excessive sadness, no propensity to injure his own family, who1 [According to the commentary ("[x]") the epithet [x] leads to the interpretation that the king ruled justly and righteously. The word may be analysed thus: [x] "General fear and panic resulting in national disaster or revolution; the subversion of a country" -- Monier-Williams.] ruled without creating any panic or fear leading to national disaster or by revolution, and who was a champion always in front line.

V. 16. A-B. Whom the Creator created as a single object, combining within himself (the spirit of the Lokapalas or quarter-regents), Indra, the Fire-god, Yama, the moon, Varuna, the Wind-god, Kubera and the Sun.

N.B. The epithets may yield the following literal meanings: — He was a victor, pure, a protector of living beings, a receptacle of the (sixty-four) arts, a purifying agent, a bestower of wealth (to the needy) and majestic.  

V. 17. A-B. Who, having resembled Brahma (Vidhi) in that he had the goddess Sarasvati (Bharati) located in his mouth, possessed a seat in himself for Laksmi (Kamala), was the lord of beings and was born of a ksatriya king,- was the upholder of the world.

N. B. In the case of Brahma himself the epithets mean: — He had Bharati in his mouth, was lotus-seated, was the creator of beings, was born of the navel of Visnu (Srlpati) and was (thus) the upholder of the world.

V. 18. A-B. Who resembled Hara in being one deserving the use of such epithets as Sankara etc. — i.e. who was the director of bliss, the lord of speech, all-knowing, the abode of all blessings, preventing injury (caused by destiny or the enemy), the follower of moral law and who (as such) attained a supreme position amongst kings.

N.B. In the case of Hara, the epithets may be taken thus: — He was called Sankara, Girisa, omniscient, the resort of Sarvamangala (Gauri), the chastiser of Kama (Mara) and had the moon for his crest-ornament.  

V. 19.A-B. Enough of prolixity! he (Rama, as well as Ramapala) was a (veritable) incarnation of Hari, because his fame, charity and mercy were great and marvellous, and his spirit was high-soaring and shining, in as much as it could prevent (the assault from) powerful enemies and cause delight to the world.

N.B. In the case of Hari (Vasudeva) the epithets signify the following: — His person could fulfil the desires of Yasoda and Nanda and it carried prominently the wheel, the conch-shell, the mace and the Nandaka (sword), and also shone while riding high on the bird (Guruda).

V. 20. A. On being approached by the son of Gadhi, bewildered (or hastening) on account of fear from the Raksasas, he (Rama) proceeded towards the distant hermitage (of the ascetic) with pleasure, equipped with arms, accompanied by Laksmana, being desirous of offering protection.

B. He (Ramapala), the tormentor of enemies, possessing formidable arms, endowed with (kingly) marks and (so) appearing resplendent, took up the protection of the kingdom (lit. the earth) after having been paid homage to by the Asvapati (king) out of fear.

V. 21. A. The power competent to offer proper protection to the world, arose in him (Rama), who attained great strength after having acquired the knowledge of weapons and the lores (Bala-vidya and Atibala-vidya) from Visvamitra whom he pleased, and who rent asunder the demoness Tadaka by his arrows.

B. The power, competent to offer protection to the world and by which the whole world was conciliated, arose in him (Ramapala), who was greater in splendour (even) than the sun, acquired the knowledge (of the use) of weapons, and did rend asunder Tala trees by means of his arrows.

V. 22. A. By him (Rama, the incarnation of Hari) was rescued, by means of his power, Gotami (Ahalya), fallen and sunk into the darkness (of sin) on account of the vice of his (Hari’s) elder brother (Indra), who took to an immoral conduct, while dwelling in the other (upper) world (i.e. heaven).

B. By him (Ramapala) was dispersed, by means of his majesty, the night of the world, full of darkness (i.e. the dark anarchy in the Pala kingdom), which fell (upon men) on account of the short-coming of his elder brother (Mahipala II), (now) residing in the other world, who adopted a wrong policy.

N. B. In the case of the variant reading of the second half of the verse the translation will be: — A. By him (Rama) was Gotma again led to the joy of family life which vanished (on account of Indra’s vice).

B. By him (Ramapala) was again attained that power which could disperse the darkness of the world — the power, which disappeared (on account of the wrong policy of Mahipala II).

V. 23. A. Rama, whose joy was enhanced by (observing) the excellent hermitage of Visvamitra (Kusika’s son), caused the destruction of (Marica), the son of Tadaka, and cut down the body of Subahu (the demon).

B. Ramapala, whose joy was enhanced by (a sight of) the constant efforts of his sons (Rajyapala and others) practising (the use of) iron weapons (e.g. swords etc.), struck down the very origin of the ungrateful ones (lit. those defeating or injuring all previous services of his) and had the strength of his excellent arms still more increased.

V. 24. A. He (Rama) reduced the large army of the Raksasas which threw the moral or religious law into confusion and thus delighted the Brahmanas; by taking up the bow with its fully drawn string (so as to form a circle) and having properly performed sacrifices he supported the world.

B. He (Ramapala), never feeling too exultant and offering adequate protection repelled or (reduced the strength of) the unholy or unfortunate civil revolution; and holding up the rod (of punishment) he went round the earth and put the world on the path trodden by the righteous.

V 25. A. By him (Rama), thus taking up the protection of the sacrificial ground, was concluded the work (of sacrifices) undertaken by Kausika, which supported the gods by the residues of sacrifices, in which the son of Sumitra (Laksmana) acted as a servant, and from which the enemies were driven away.

B. By him (Ramapala), the lord, protecting the domains of his allies, was accomplished such a work as is performed by Kausika (Indra) himself, in which learned men were pleased by (offer of) unsolicited gifts and in which good and friendly kings offered their services, and from which enemies were repulsed.

V. 26. A. This (Rama) in the company of Kausika (as leader), with his large (right) arm feeling a sensation of itching for drawing the string of the bow of Hara (Bhima), felt delight on reaching the country of Videha (Mithila).

B. This (Ramapala), with his large arms feeling a sensation of itching (a teasing desire) to pull up the life of King Bhima, accompanied by an army consisting of men using iron weapons (or, resembling the army of Indra) felt delight in getting hold of the services of countries (the people of) which act with intelligence.

V. 27. A. Moreover, he (Rama), of unparalleled strength, broke asunder quickly with the playful movement of his shoot-like hands, the huge bow of Hara (Bhava) in a manner putting to shame all other princes, and (thus) delighted Janaka.  

B. Moreover, he (Ramapala), who was in possession of incomparably large wealth, cut short the world calamity by liberal gifts (from his hands) and (thereby) pleased the people; and (at the same time) put down the affray (or disturbance, caused by the enemy) by the use of arms at ease, so as to repulse all other kings, and thus granted protection to the people.

V. 28. A. This (Rama), who (as Visnu incarnated) was the younger brother to Indra, (the king of gods), fittingly married Janaki, who was Laksmi herself. Her other sisters also became the charming wives to his other younger brothers, (performing) their nuptial ceremonies.

B. This (Ramapala), who was Surapala’s younger brother, capably assumed the (royal) glory belonging to his father (Vigrahapala III). And the strength of his sons, which bore the stamp of his own, was accompanied by lustre and had war as its favourite pursuit.

V. 23. A. He (Rama) destroyed, by means of his military art, the (chance of) residence in heaven of (Parasurama), the enemy of the thousand-armed king (Karttaviryya), who took possession of the whole earth again and again (i.e. twenty-one times) by killing the Ksattriya rulers.

B. He (Ramapala), becoming thousand-armed (as it were) by the skilful use of weapons (i.e. the art of warfare), destroyed the comfortable position of his enemy (the Kaivarta king), who had occupied a major portion of the kingdom after having killed the chief king (Mahipala).

V. 30. A. Intent on fulfilling his obligation to his wicked mother (Kaikeyi), he (Rama) proceeded towards the Dandaka forest, being accompanied by his most valiant younger brother (Laksmana), and with splendour enhanced by his virtuous wife whose request (to follow him) was complied with (lit. who was obeyed).

B. He (Ramapala), with his most valiant son, proved (lit. carried) danda (punishment or open attack) as the best and most effective policy, was bent upon humiliating the wicked, and placed his royal fortune at the disposal of the good.

V. 31. A. At first, his (Rama’s) father, the lord of the earth, having died and his brother, Bharata, having taken up the burden of (rule of) the earth in which no creator of disturbance remained, and having (thus himself) assumed the authority that belonged to Rama; —

B. Previously, his (Ramapala’s) father (Vigrahapala III) having died and his brother Mahipala (II), intent on pursuing impolitic methods, having taken up the burden of (rule of) the earth and (thus) having caused mental agony to Rama (—Ramapala, then lying in chains); —

V. 32. A. But Rama, the large-hearted, forgiving, having turned an ascetic, and (as such) having hastened to the Citrakuta mountain, so hard with series of uneven rocks as its pavement;—

B. But Ramapala, the large-hearted, (but) impatient, having been reduced to pitiable condition, having (credulously) approached or taken recourse to king (Mahipala II), who was given to wonderful tricks and was as hard as a solid pavement of stone; —

V. 33. A. (Rama) having taken up residence, along with his other brother (Laksmana), in the terrible huge forest where housing was a difficult task, and also having in his company his wife, whose breasts were to be rent by the misconduct of the crow, as damned fate would have it;

B. (Ramapala), under the untoward influence of Destiny dwelling in the terrible well-guarded prison-house, along with his second brother (Surapala), with his knees, which had never bent (before anyone), rent by the creeper-like chains of new-(forged) iron; —

V. 34. A. (Rama) having rendered that crow one-eyed and having brought about the calamity (of death) to Viradha and Kabandha, and (then) having entered the hermitage of Pancavati by proceeding along the southern direction; —

B. Ramapala, to whom the evil-doers were pointed out (or told about), who himself underwent the most distressing calamity of imprisonment, who reached the climax of (the conduct of) upright people, and who lost (chance of) possession (or accumulation) even of five cowries.

V. 35. A. (Rama) having humiliated (Surpanakha), the sister of that Raksasa (lit. the eater of flesh, i.e. Ravana), (the woman) who had a large number of kinsmen, with her nose and mouth deformed, on account of her having her face (disfigured) with nose severed from it and having brought about the death of Khara and caused the destruction of Dusana and Trisiras;

B. (Ramapala) having largely wasted his own strength and flesh etc., for want of food to eat (in prison) and having suffered from extreme torture, (but yet), having cut off the triad of vices; --

V. 36. A. (Rama) having torn asunder the array of troops (of Ravana) in Janasthana forest, having appointed his brother (Laksmana) for guarding Sita (lit. the daughter of the Earth), and having (himself) been dragged away by the greed of catching the illusory deer (i.e. Marica), fleet like the flash of lighting;

B. (Ramapala), with his brother (Mahipala) determined not to protect truth and polity, having lost his power of reasoning (or judgment) by his stay in that solitary place (prison-cell) and having been kept secluded (there) on account of (his brother’s) foolish notion of (the latter's plotting against) his own royalty which is as unsteady as the flash of lighting; —

V. 37. A. (Rama’s) younger brother, (Laksmana), appointed to guard his (wife), having proceeded, to the same direction (as his brother), on account of the use of language of reproof by (Sita) (lit. the daughter of Earth), who, because of the sound, (uttered) by that rogue (Marica), suspected danger to her husband; —

B. (Ramapala, Mahipala’s) younger brother, the (future) protector (of the realm), having thus fallen into a miserable plight on account of the acts of fraudulence of the king of the land of great extent (i.e. Mahipala II), who suspected his own danger (from him) by the report of the mischievous people.

V. 38. A. His (Rama’s) wife, that divine (lady), the daughter of Jonahs, Sita by name, the ornament of his house, was stolen away by the mighty robber, the ten-headed demon (Ravana), under the guise of an ascetic.

B. His (Ramapala’s) beautiful father-land (Varendri), decorated with houses as well as lines of furrows, was occupied by his enemy named Divya (Divokka), an (officer) sharing royal fortune, who rose to a high position, (but) who took to fraudulent practice as a vow.

V. 39. A. Certainly that (lady, Sita), so eminent in beauty, became an object of protection (and no enjoyment) of that terrible (demon) who was a maker of Indra, whose younger brothers and sons became frightened (by his action) and who knocked down the chief of birds (Jatayu).

B. It is certain that that (land), Varendri by name, becoming frightened, became the object of protection of Bhima, the son of his (Divya’s) younger brother (Rudoka), who knew how to deal a blow on a vulnerable point (of his enemy), and who was competent to work out any scheme.  

V. 40. A. Then having killed Marica, that Rama, whose wife had been lost to him and who (therefore) possessed a pair of powerless (or idle) arms, thought, along with his younger brother (Laksmana), of his own cottage (lit. residence) as empty.

B. Then that Ramapala, who possessed a pair of powerless arms, (but) by means of which the enemies were absolutely doomed to extinction, considered his own strength to be futile, although he had his relatives near (him) and was in the company of his sons.

V. 41. A. Moreover, this (Rama) who lost (or was deprived of) his patience as well as all activities, and was inflamed by the fire of his intense anger, did not even know his body lying prostrate on earth at that time.

B. Moreover, this (Ramapala) at that time did not possibly care for the lordship of earth as something small, having been deprived of his beloved land (Varendri) and consumed by the fire of his heavy sorrow.

V. 42. A. With the appearance of the calamity, (Rama) had his serious fit of unconsciousness removed by his only companion, his younger brother, with care and with a method which had a soothing effect, and having (thus) regained consciousness (he) rose up.

B. At the appearance of danger, (Ramapala) having carefully discussed all pros and cons with his ministers and sons, in accordance with the injunctions4 [For these vidhis or rules vide Book I ([x]) of Kautilya.] of vinaya (discipline), made a firm resolve and took recourse to enterprise or promptitude (of action).

V. 43. A. By him (Rama), being attentive to his object (of finding out) his beloved (Sita), the country, which was full of numerous hills and overspread with forests containing various and huge beasts of prey, was then traversed with difficulty.

B. By him (Ramapala), being intent on attaining his desired object, the land belonging to numerous kings and inhabited by different, great and1 [The commentator takes the word [x] to mean rulers who seized or appropriated to themselves agrahara lands (i.e. endowments of land conferred on Brahmans).] fierce forest-chiefs was travelled over with difficulty.

V. 44. A. He (Rama), with long arms, accepted, with approval, Sugriva (lit. the son of the sun-god), as one who, being the chief (lit. native) source of strength and having (as such) entered into friendship with him, approached (him) with a promise of help.

B. He (Ramapala), with long arms, accepted with approbation the compact circle of samantas (vassals or feudal chiefs), which was a source of the supply of his retinue,9 ['The source of prosperity' according to the commentary.] the policy of which was kept secret, and which having entered into alliance with him offered him help.

V. 45. A. By that person (Rama) he (Sugriva) was propitiated by the killing of Balin (lit. the son of Indra) of great strength, (and) he largely achieved (thereby) very great power as (lit. in the rank of) the chief of the monkeys.

Image
Hanuman tearing up his chest to show Sita-Rama in his heart

-- Hanuman, by Wikipedia


B. By that king (Ramapala) that (body of samantas), who attained great strength by possession of cavalry, elephants and infantry, was gained over (i.e. made favourable) by presents of land and enormous wealth.

V. 46-47. A. Then the great sea with its high and impassable waves was crossed over by (Hanumat), the son of the Wind-god begotten on the wife of Kesarin, who was strong, who drove away the chief Raksasas (lit. flesh-eaters), who was searching for his (Rama’s) consort by command of his own master (Sugriva), to whom were reported the whereabouts (of Sita) by the chief of birds (Sampatin), by whom was rent asunder the Mahendra (mountain) under the pressure of his unbearably heavy strides and who looked endowed with lustre.

Image
The giant leap of Hanuman to Lanka

Linguistic variations of "Hanuman" include Hanumat.

-- Hanuman, by Wikipedia


B. Then the great river Ganga, with its large and impassable waves, was soon crossed over by Sivaraja in the height of his glory4, [The comm. describes that [x] glory or radiance as due to [x] which perhaps means the same thing as [x] of astrology. The five angas refer to [x], [x], [x], [x] and [x]. It means that the Mahapratihara starts on his expedition and is crossing the Ganges in the height of glory under the most favourable condition of the five, [x], [x] and others. -- N.G.B.] with speed, (riding) on an elephant, being intent on doing good, by command of his lord (Ramapala), — (this officer) being known for his valour by possession of excellent cavalry, who had an army, who was resplendent as the Sun (lit. the hot-rayed one), of whom Mahendra was afraid because of his prowess in battle, and who resembled a lion-cub (in strength).

V. 48. A. In course of the search Sita (was found out) and waited upon by that (Hanumat) possessing the lustre of the sun, while she was in the clutches of the fierce demons and remained terrified, with nothing except mere breath of life left to her, and feeling wretched on account of her bewilderment by the multitude of objects of the senses (heaped round her).

B. That land (Varendri), where Bhima’s work of protection was all upset, which stood miserable because of the visayas (districts) and villages falling in confusion (regarding their ownership) and which was in a frightened condition, — was, in course of a (thorough) search, split up by that (Siva, raja) by the power of his sword.

V. 49. A. She (Sita) having been consoled by means of message, that enemy’s (Ravana’s) park along with the arrays of its guards was shattered, and his city, named Lanka, was also burnt down (by that Hanumat).

Image
The Battle at Lanka, Ramayana by Sahibdin. It depicts the monkey army of the protagonist Rama (top left, blue figure) fighting Ravana—the demon-king of the Lanka—to save Rama's kidnapped wife, Sita. The painting depicts multiple events in the battle against the three-headed demon general Trishira, in bottom left. Trishira is beheaded by Hanuman, the monkey-companion of Rama.

-- Ramayana, by Wikipedia


B. That (land, Varendri,) having been quickly devastated (by him) as directed (by Ramapala), along with the arrays of (Bhima’s) guards, the defence of (Ramapala’s) enemy (Bhima) was thoroughly smashed. Which city, may it be asked, could be inhabited (there) at ease?

V. 50. A. Thus having fulfilled the command and returned, he (Hanumat), the killer of Aksa, who showed (Rama) her token (of recognition), announced to her husband Janaki as situated in that condition and lying on (bare) ground.

B. Thus having fulfilled the command and returned, he (Sivaraja), so famous and experienced, whose hands were not resisted (by any one), announced before his own lord (Ramapala) that his father-land standing in that circumstance had been occupied (by himself).

Here ends Canto I of the Ramacarita, called “Rama in action”.

_______________

Notes:

1. HS has [x]. The form of [x] in [x] is midway between that of [x] and [x]. But [x] is clear.

1. MS [x]

2. MS [x]

3. MS [x]

4. MS [x]  

1. The MS has [x] which suits neither the metre nor the sense. The commentary reads [x] which has been adopted by us in the text.

2. MS [x]

3. MX [x]

4. Comm. [x]

1. MS [x]

2. MS [x]

3. Comm. [x]

4. Comm. [x]

5. MS [x]

6. MS [x]

7. The rhetorical figure Slesopama suggests another meaning of the verse: -- The earth was borne aloft from the midst of the ocean by Visnu (Laksmipati) in the form of the Board, -- the same Visnu, who had the strength of a mountain and was the ornament of the solar family of kings as Rama, and who moved the hill of Govardhana and was the ornament of the lunar family of kings as Krsna.

1. MS [x]

2. MS [x]

3. MS [x]

1. MS [x]

2. MS [x]. The metre of the verse is slightly defective.

3. HS has [x], but the [x] sign is clear in MS.

4. HS [x]

5. MS [x]

6. MS [x]

7. MS [x]

1. MS [x]

2. MS [x]

3. HS [x]

4. MS [x]

5. MS [x]

6. MS [x]

7. MS [x]

1. HS [x]

2. HS [x]

3. MS [x]. For [x] Vide Kautilya VII. 3.

4. MS has [x] which is clearly a mistake of the scribe.

5. MS [x] instead of [x]

6. HS [x]

7. MS [x]

8. MS [x]

9. MS [x]

10. [x]

1. HS [x]

2. MS [x]

3. MS [x]

4. MS [x]

5. HS [x]

6. MS [x]

7 MS [x]

1. MS [x]

2. MS [x]

3. MS [x]

4. MS [x]

5. Between [x] and [x] there appears a sign of lupta-akara in the MS.

1. MS [x]

2. MS [x]

3. MS [x]

4. MS [x]

5. MS [x]

6. MS [x]

7. MS [x]

8. MS [x]

9. This appears to be a lexicographical quotation.

1. MS [x]

2. MS [x]

3. HS [x]

4. MS [x]

5. MS [x]

6. MS [x] There is the usual mark of omission on the top of the letter [x]

7. MS

8. MS [x]

9. MS [x]

1. According to the commentary ("[x]") the epithet [x] leads to the interpretation that the king ruled justly and righteously. The word may be analysed thus: [x] "General fear and panic resulting in national disaster or revolution; the subversion of a country" -- Monier-Williams.

2. MS [x]

1. MS [x]

2. MS [x]

3. MS [x]

1. MS has after [x], "[x]" which is obviously redundant. The bracketted portion of the text has been restored by HS with the help of the commentary.

2. MS [x]

3. MS [x]

4. MS [x]

5. MS [x]

6. MS [x]

7. MS [x]

8. Both HS and MS [x]

1. MS [x]

2. MS [x]

3. MS [x]

4. HS [x]

5. MS [x]

6. MS [x]

1. MS [x]

2. MS [x]

3. Mark the different reading of the last half of the verse. MS has [x] between [x] and [x], which is superfluous.

4. MS [x]

5. MS [x]

6. Here occur in the MS the words [x] which the scribe might have simply repeated from the preceding line.

1. HS [x]

2. MS [x]

3. Between [x] and [x] MS has [x] which is redundant.

4. This seems to be the first line of a quoted verse, the rest of which has probably been omitted by the scribe.

5. MS [x]

6. MS [x]

7 MS [x]

8. MS [x] HS takes it to mean a "son" and corrects thus: [x]. But what we generally meet with is not the word [x], but [x] or [x], to mean a [x], one of the several varieties of sons, mentioned in the Smritis and Nitisastras. Cf. Kautilya II. 7. where the definition of a [x] son is given thus [x] i.e. an artificially acknowledged son. A reference to such a son is unsuitable in the present context. Hence we propose the reading [x], by restoring [x], and translate accordingly.

1. MS [x]. HS [x]. The word [x], a form of the root [x] in [x] gives no sense at all here. It appears that the proper word meant is [x], (in place of the scribe's [x]), the [x] form of the [x] root [x] ([x]). The commentator also gives [x] as its synonym in the first case. Other emendations that may be suggested are [x] and [x], the [x] forms of the roots [x] ([x]) and [x] ([x]) respectively of the same [x].

2. HS thinks "[x]" as superfluous. But it does not appear to be so, otherwise the exigencies of metre cannot be met.

3. Should it be [x]?

4. MS has [x] which yields no suitable sense here. Probably some such word as [x], [x] or [x] was meant by the commentator.

5. MS has [x] instead of [x] (as wrongly read by HS) in both the places.

6. HS [x]

7. MS [x]

1. MS [x].

2. MS [x]

3. HS [x]

4. After [x] MS has [x] which is unnecessary and inexplicable.

5. MS [x]

6. MS [x].

7. MS [x]

1. MS [x]

2. Restored from the commentary.

3. MS [x]

4. HS [x]. Cf. [x] (Oppert's Edition, p. 98) -- "[x]", and also [x] -- "[x]}. In Kautilya (II.6) we have the compound [x].

5. MS [x]

6. MS [x]

7. MS [x], HS [x]

1. MS [x]

2. MS [x]

3. Restored from the commentary.

1. MS [x]

2. MS [x]

3. MS [x]. HS corrects it thus: "[x]". Evidently the commentator quotes or refers to the Vartika on Panini VIII. 3. 36, which runs thus: -- "[x]". Such elision of visarga is taken recourse to by mediaeval poets for the sake of slesa.

4. MS [x]

5. MS [x]

6. MS has "[x]" repeated after [x]

7. MS [x]

1. MS [x], HS [x]

2. The last paragraph of the commentary should better be taken as the introduction to the next verse.

3. MS [x]

4. MS [x]

5. HS [x]

6. MS [x]

7. HS [x]

8. MS [x]

9. MS [x]

1. MS [x]

2. MS [x]

1. MS has only [x] instead of [x].

2. MS [x]

3. MS [x]

4. MS [x]

5. HS [x]

6. [x], which is a [x] root, is not generally much used in literature.

7. MS [x]

8. MS [x]

9. MS [x]

10. MS [x]

1. MS [x]

2. Here this is not quite a correct grammatical compound.

3. MS [x]. It should be corrected into [x] which means 'one having a large number of kinsmen'. The word [x] in the commentary is an adjective to [x], so is [x].

4. MS [x]

5. HS [x]

6. MS has "[x]" after [x] which is redundant. HS reads "[x]" for [x].

1. The middle syllable is doubtful. It may be read as [x]. HS doubtfully takes it as [x].

2. [x] may be a better reading here.

3. HS corrects the reading wrongly into [x].

4. HS omits [x] here.

5. MS [x].

6. MS [x]

7. MS [x]

8. Before this word occurs in the MS the word [x] which seems superfluous.

1. MS [x]

2. MS [x]

3. MS [x]

4. MS [x]

5. Instead of [x] there is the sign of [x] in MS.

6. MS [x]

7. MS [x]

8. MS [x]

1. MS [x]

2. MS [x]

3. MS has [x] in text and [x] in commentary.

1. MS [x]

2. MS [x]

3. MS [x]

4. MS [x]

5. "[x]" here, we think, has the sense of [x].

1. MS has [x] after [x], which is redundant.

2. The letter [x] looks like [x].

3. MS [x]. Before this word MS has [x], which seems superfluous.

4. For these vidhis or rules vide Book I ([x]) of Kautilya.

5. MS [x]

1. The commentator takes the word [x] to mean rulers who seized or appropriated to themselves agrahara lands (i.e. endowments of land conferred on Brahmans).

2. MS [x]

3. MS [x]

4. MS [x]

5. MS [x]

6. MS [x]

7. MS [x]

8. 'The source of prosperity' according to the commentary.

1. MS [x]

2. MS [x]

3. HS reads [x]. The letter [x] is rather indistinct.

4. MS [x]

5. MS [x]

6. MS [x]

7. MS [x]

1. MS [x]

2. MS [x]

3. The commentator's explanation here is difficult to understand. The five angas generally referred to in such expression as [x] are the head, eyes, chest, hands and feet. Does the compound word refer to grace in these five limbs of Sivaraja at the time?

4. The comm. describes that [x] glory or radiance as due to [x] which perhaps means the same thing as [x] of astrology. The five angas refer to [x], [x], [x], [x] and [x]. It means that the Mahapratihara starts on his expedition and is crossing the Ganges in the height of glory under the most favourable condition of the five, [x], [x] and others. -- N.G.B.

1. MS [x]

2. MS [x]

3. MS [x]

4. MS [x]

1. MS [x]

2. MS [x]

3. MS has the reading [x], which spoils both sense and metre.

4. MS [x]

5. MS has a redundant [x] after [x].

6. MS [x]
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 33177
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: The Ramacaritam of Sandhyakaranandin

Postby admin » Sun May 16, 2021 8:40 am

Canto II: [Probably the chapter was named “the slaughter of the enemy by Rama”.]

V. 1. A-B. This Rama (also, Ramapala), of great majesty, with visible bristling hairs (on his body i.e. with a thrill of joy), having his heroic strength (or enthusiasm) running high with courage, anger and pride, made strenuous exertion towards victory over his enemy.

VV. 2-4. A. The monkey heroes, — quite competent to pull up mountains, with their vigour doubly increased by the encouragement from (Hanumat), the son of Wind, and with great merriment, having been joined by the forces of Nila and Angada, lending their support to Kumuda, having enormous strength (or moving with great speed), accompanied by Nala, Prthu and Rambha, meeting Rabhasa, united with the armies of Tara, Puskara, Gaja and others, raising together a tumultuous uproar, clapping (their hands), shaking their hard palms and tails, with their thunderbolt-like claws which they used as weapons, and (being led) by the brilliant Jambavat (the chief of the bears), — resorted to Rama.

B. The great heroes, — pre-eminently fit to rescue the earth (i.e. Varendri), with their power doubly increased by the encouragement from presents (of money), looking bright with their armlets and bracelets set with sapphires, cheering up the earth (with their bright faces), possessing enormous strength, industrious and well- meaning, having attained impetuosity, with large undertakings, with armies of elephants and others, (marching) to the music of high-sounding drums, creating a noisy tumult, lofty (in spirit), standing firm with their fierce swords, possessing faces (hard) like thunderbolts, and wielding formidable weapons, with their faces (now) looking bright as the moon (lit. the lord of the stars), — became attached to Ramapala.

V. 5. A. He (Rama) was competent to conquer the world, having been followed by those (armies of monkeys) of great strength, who were of adorable virtues, possessed of the valour of lions, the very jewels among heroes, and having the energy (or brilliance) of the sun.

B. He (Ramapala) was competent to conquer the earth, having been joined by those (warriors) having large armies, viz., Vandya (Bhimayasas), Guna (Viraguna), Simha (Jayasimha), Vikrama (Vikramaraja), Sura (Laksmisura, as also Surapala), Sikhara (Rudrasikhara), Bhaskara (Mayagalasiha) and Pratapa (Pratapasiha).

V. 6. A. Rama, whose face resembled the moon, who achieved victory over Parasurama by whom Arjima (Karttaviryarjuna) was cut to pieces, and who was the promoter of the interests of his supplicants, relied on the support of the strong arms of his extremely devoted and unequalled younger brother (Laksmana).

B. Ramapala, who enhanced the prosperity of Arjuna (Narasimharajuna, as also Candarjuna) and Vijaya (Vijayaraja) coming to him (as allies), who solicited the help of Vardhana (Dvorapavardhana), and who had (other) associates (samantas) headed by Soma, depended on the support of the strong arms of his obedient cousins viz., the sons of his maternal uncle.

V. 7. A. Also, he (Rama), whose arrays of picked monkeys were constructed by (Sugriva), the son of the sun-god (lit. the hot-rayed one), and who urged on tumultuous army which defied his enemies, was unequalled and (looked) smart on the battle-field.

B. Also, he (Ramapala), whose arrays of horses and elephants were constructed by his sons, (Rajyapala and others), of formidable prowess and who led a tumultuous army consisting of the four divisions (viz. horse, elephant, foot and boat), which is (to be) victorious over the armies, whose mirth in battle was unparalleled.
 
V. 8. A. He (Rama), on the other hand, looked upon his own two large arms as his allies, which possessed of the strength of the (Mandara) mountain that churned the milk ocean, and which would conquer (Ravana), the unscrupulous warrior of the hostile dominion.

B. He (Ramapala), however, counted upon his victorious pair of staff-like arms as well as his own kinsmen (viz. Kahnaradeva and Suvarnadeva, also Sivaraja), finest warriors in the excellent Rastrakuta race, and born in the family of Mathana by whom Sindhuraja (Devaraksita of Pithi) was completely put down (lit. drained of his wealth and resources).

V. 9. A. Then having led this vast army, that Rama of exceedingly wonderful valour, having maintained his strength and conducted a safe passage (of the army across the ocean), shone, as he ably faced the foe.

B. Then...that Ramapala... across the Ganges)...

N.B. Here by the figure slesopama, both Rama and Ramapala are likened to Karttikeye (Tarakari), who wields the missile called sakti and rides on the bird (peacock) of various colours.

V. 10. A. The huge army, of him (Rama) marching against his enemy, having been protected from danger by (Sugriva), the son of the sun-god, there arose a shrill shout, indicative of mirth, resounding all the quarters.

B. The great river (Ganges) having been covered over by a fleet of boats belonging to him (Ramapala), proceeding to encounter his enemy, there took place a successful crossing (of the river) during which an uproar arose resounding all the quarters.

V. 11. A. He (Rama), the great hero, while putting in order and encamping those armies competent to go everywhere, covered the other coast of the great ocean.

B. He (Ramapala), so energetic,... covered the northern bank of the river (Ganges). 

VV. 12-13. A. (A bridge), which was undertaken (to be built) by those great warriors (Hanumat and others), by whom huge and distant hills were hurled up root and branch, by means of their large arms appearing like shoots of thunderbolt (or hatchet), whose (ever) youthful forearms5 [Can the second line of verse 12 be interpreted as follows: -- "by whom the large rooms (of the residences) of gods (living in mountains) were caused to be removed into waters on account of the digging up of the hard hills"? -- R.G.B.] felt quite chafed (or irritated) in pulling up the hard hills, who (thus) removed obstruction to the view of the nether world (lit. the world of the Nagas), who well devised (the plan of) the destruction of the demons and who put forth excessive efforts (to that end).

B. (A battle) which was raged (or set on foot) by those great heroes, by whom the large families of their enemies were extirpated up to their root, by means of their huge arms appearing like shoots of thunderbolt (or hatchet), whose youthful forearms felt chafed (or irritated) in drawing their hard bows, who removed (in course of their fight) the light-protective eye-veils (or screens) of their elephant troops, who bestowed special attention on their cavalry, and who devised well all means of defence.

V. 14. A. (A bridge), which caused to the fish a great disturbance in their own regions by the hills (thrown into the sea), on account of which the large aquatic animals were moving at (great) speed, which was crowded by the distracted flocks of (aquatic) birds and which was striking constantly against the skate-fish.

B. (A battle), in which (both the rival) kings, (Ramapala and Bhima), kept close to each other, in a greatly agitated mood, in which the strong combatants were rushing in great speed, which was perilous on account of series of arrows thrown (in quick succession), and in which there were incessant blows of javelins (or spears).

V. 15. A. (A bridge), which came in terrible collision with the hosts of alligators and sharks moving with their fearfully gaping mouths, by which the earth was delighted, and by which the great bulk of high waves of the ocean was passed over and checked.

B. (A battle), in which there was a terrible encounter amongst swordsmen, who made a fearful display of swords, moved towards and jumped upon (each other), and in which the great (joyous) course of the horses, bred in Sindhu (country), was held up and dealt with by splendid lancers.

V. 16. A. (A bridge), in (the construction of) which the strength of the monkey troops, who surpassed the speed of the wind, was known (or recognised), on account of which the flocks of Ati-birds were dislodged from their resorts, by which the water-elephants with flowing ichor were crushed, and by which the waters (of the sea) with many (aquatic) birds were broken through.

B. (A battle), in which the cavalry troops, surpassing the speed of the wind, were cut down to pieces, in which the multitudes of foot-soldiers were severely injured, in which elephants with flowing ichor were stricken down, and in which many heroes were split asunder.

V. 17. A. (A bridge), which, by reason of its hasty construction with rocks, made the aquatic animals (so many) lifeless corpses, by means of which the chief enemy (Ravana) was reached, and from which the energetic whales of incomparably huge bodies met with a check to their strength.

B. (A battle), which was a tumultuous one on account of the (contending) forces of unequalled progress, appearing enlivened, though being thinned in ranks (in action), and in which the great enemy (Bhima) was perforce taken prisoner alive, by an evil turn of Destiny.

V. 18. A. (A bridge), a much trodden one, by which conches and clouds were dispersed on account of their striking against the rocks, which moved up by the stirring of hills, and which caused the waters (of the ocean), having tremendous formations, to dance.

B. (A battle), which was a confused one, in which the forehead bones and necks (of soldiers) were split up to pieces by their dashing against rocks, and in which the blood from the dancing heads and headless trunks (of killed soldiers) was stirred up by the obstruction of the rocks.

V. 19. A. (A bridge) which helped a restoration of the world’s blessings, which was the (veritable) Meru mountain having jewels easy to attain, which was the Kailasa mountain (lit. the silver mount) presenting itself, and which was the ocean god himself (the source of all gems) called by up Hara, and which enabled Indra to arrange for the enjoyment of love of the heavenly damsels (made prisoners by Ravana).

B. (A battle) which provided a good living for birds, dogs and jackals, which proved a veritable Meru, making wealth of jewels etc. available to all, which appeared as a mountain of silver (to the victorious warriors), in which the ocean-god (lit. the mine of gems) was invited by Hara to attend (he being the ancestor of the Pala kings) and in which the enjoyment of love (by the soldiers dying there), offered by the heavenly damsels, had the sanction of Dharma (Vrsa).  

V. 20. A. That terrible ocean was bound over by Rama, who had a reliable follower in (Vibhisana), the second (uterine) brother of (Ravana), the lord of the demons (lit. flesh-eaters), having constructed a bridge of rocks (over it).

B. That Bhima, while he was seated on an elephant, disgracefully panic-stricken was captured by Ramapala making war, with (men) of all quarters of the earth, won over to his side.

V. 21. A. (That ocean) by resorting to which alone, as he was the preserver of waters, the winged mountains obtained their own protection (from the attacks of) Indra (Jisnu), who was their enemy.

B. (That Bhima)— by joining whom alone, as he was the defender of those who required defence, the kings, belonging to his own party, secured their own safety from their victorious enemy.

V. 22. A. (That ocean)— into which thousands of rivers (flowing) from the wingless mountains, running on irresistibly, enter, on all sides, united with all sorts of currents.

B. (That Bhima) — in (fighting) whom, thousands of soldiers belonging to the enemy, quite irresistible, with all sorts of equipments, sank (or disappeared) completely.

V. 23. A. (That ocean) — the abode of waters, the source of all gems, in which Laksmi herself, as well as the Parijata (tree), the chief horse (Uccaihsravas), the chief elephant (Airavata) and other things lived.

B. (That Bhima) — the abode of all treasures, in whose possession there were excellent cavalary, elephant troops etc., having no rivals (to fight them); and (with whom were) even Sarasvati and Laksmi.

V. 24. A. (That ocean), by resorting to whom, Laksmi was obtained by Visnu (Visvambhara) and nectar by the gods, and Sambhu (Siva) got the moon.

B. (That Bhima) by getting whom as its king, the whole world got prosperity in plenty, and virtuous men obtained unsolicited charities, and the earth also found peace.

V. 25. A. (That ocean), the original home of the Kalpa tree, depending on which (for their waters), the clouds seeking the good of others resuscitated the entire earth, after having ascended the sky (lit. the path of Achyuta or Visnu).

B. (That Bhima), possessing the very (charitable) nature of the Kalpa tree, whose large number of solicitors (and officers), having attained very secure position (for themselves) and (also) having promoted the interests of others, enlivened the whole country.

V. 26. A. (The ocean) bright with pearls, in the interior of which that (much) adored god (Visnu), having for his emblem Garuda (lit. the chief of birds), was himself present, lying on Sesa (the lord of serpents), attended by Laksmi.

B. (That Bhima), who has cast aside all impurities, in whose heart there dwelt in person that moon-crested god (Siva), adorned with serpents and accompanied by Bhavani.

V. 27. A. (The ocean), which earned the epithet, of mahasaya (a great receptacle), and shone as a vast sheet of water, surpassing the walls of the different quarters by its (volume of) waters, (but yet) never transgressing its own limits, in which snakes have formed a great stronghold, and the swelling of which was caused by the moon (lit. the lord of the stars).

B. (That Bhima), who showed the nobleness of his purpose (or intention) by following a righteous course, who had no inclination towards greed, by whom the quarters to their extreme limits were brightened up with his fame, but who did never transgress the bounds (of propriety).

V. 28. A. The Suvela mountain, situated on the other side, was occupied by him (Rama), after having crossed over the ocean by means of (the bridge of) rocks and caused delight by tidings to Sita (the daughter of Janaka) who was abandoned to her fate.

B. That enemy — king (Bhima) — was helped to descend (from the back of his elephant) by him (Ramapala) who distributed (among his successful followers) jewels and treasures, after having caused jubilation by good messages to his fatherland (Varendri), reoccupied at an auspicious moment.

V. 29. A. (The mountain), the uneven or formidable ridges of which were ground (to dust) by the stamping of the redoubtable armies of Rama, and the elephants of which (therefore) took recourse to the speed of their legs for retreat as the (only means) to safety.

B. (Bhima), whose beautiful encampment was crushed by the impact of the unrest-trained soldiers of Ramapala, and whose elephants used the (full) speed of their legs as the (only) means of escape (from annihilation).  

V. 30. A. That (mountain), which was left by lions, from which buffaloes fled away, the foot-hills of which were shaken and summits struck down and which had the whole expanse of its forests divested of beauty and made perishable on account of the fury of the attack.  

B. That (Bhima), who was deserted by his cavalry and had no buffaloes (for transport work), whose infantry was shaken and supremacy destroyed, and whose broad face was without its beauty and hung down on account of the extreme humiliation (lit. excess) of the defeat.

V. 31. A. All at once, (that mountain) became devoid of its association with birds and antelopes, where the serpents were killed, and in which the dens of ferocious animals were destroyed, the rhinoceroses etc. dispersed and bears lost their (own) places.

B. All at once, (that king, Bhima) became deprived of his territory and devoid of all the constituent elements (of sovereignty), with his eye-sight and hearing permanently impaired, who became the abode of all kinds of calamities, whose swords etc. were thrown about and whose wife had no place to set her foot upon.

V. 32. A. (That mountain), of which a changed condition was brought about with regard to its circles of huge boulders which were thrown down, numerous waterfalls and rows of bowers, and which contained an increasing uproar (of the monkey force) in its reverberated lines of caves, and which became greatly agitated in (all) its caves or hollows.

B. (That Bhima), whose war by the help of elephants, having flows (of ichor) issuing from their broad cheeks, was rendered futile, and the noise of whose army went on increasing by wailings reverberating in all the quarters, and who trembled with fear.

V. 33. A. People also saw that (mountain) having its neighbouring gardens without their leaves, sprouts, trunks etc., coloured with various metallic ores and with all its mines destroyed.

B. People also saw that (Bhima), with his line of vehicles (e.g. horses, camels etc) and the trouble of (military) practice with arrows etc. rendered unfruitful, afflicted in various ways, vanquished, and with both his hands drooping.

V. 34. A. That (mountain) was soon bereft of beauty, because such of its parts as peaks and table-lands, of gold, silver and jewels, were injured by the followers of the chief of monkeys who mercilessly trod upon (them).

B. That (Bhima) was forthwith deprived of all his wealth consisting of gold, silver and jewels, arranged in heaps and (measured by) prasthas, which disappeared on account of their forcible possession by the merciless wanderers.

V. 35. A. Thus in that (mountain), they (the monkeys?), now the paramours of the damsels of gods, vidyadharas and gandharvas, felt (rather) disconsolate, though their dalliance was sustained (?) by rise of passion inflamed by (their taking of) Kalpa wine.

B. Thus with regard to that (Bhima), they (the warriors), now that they became paramours of the damsels of gods, vidyadharas and gandharvas, felt sad, though their enjoyment was kept up by the intense love (of those celestial beauties) which they had won according to the injunction of the Sastras3. [Because the Kalpa or injunction of Sastras is that warriors fallen in battle are destined to go to heaven and enjoy celestial damsels.]

N.B. — No old Sanskrit commentary on the poem, beginning from verse 36 of Canto II, has yet been discovered. The rest of the work is now being commented upon in Sanskrit by the editors for the first time.

V. 36. A. Then at once Angada (lit. the son of Indra’s son i.e. Bali) who was (always) respectful, was despatched by Rama, with great speed, into the presence of Ravana (lit. the younger-brother of Kubera, the lord of wealth).

B. Then, perforce, that person (Bhima), whose policy attained ruin and who had got frightened, was transferred to the charge of (his) son, Vittapala, by Ramapala of great prowess (or speed).

V. 37. A. He, (Angada) though honoured with a hospitable reception, did not obtain the desired object (i.e. Sita’s release) from this demon (Ravana). Angada, having thwarted the attempt of the enemies, (and approaching him) with a salutation made Sugriva (lit. the son of the Sun-god) rejoice.

B. He did not obtain his longed-for object (i.e. his own release) from this good man (Vittapala), though honoured with hospitality, and surrendering his person and (then) eluding the vigilance of the enemies with (pretended) humility, caused rejoicings to his elder brother’s son1 [To hazard a conjecture, Bhima’s elder brother's son was none other than Hari, who is mentioned in the next verse as his great ally, who replenished and reorganised his army.].

V. 38 A. Then a dreadful army, with its strength not to be measured by the great flesh-eating  demons, was raised by him (Rama), who had the monkey-chief (Sugriva) as his ally and who had thoroughly laid a seize to the enemy's territory.

B. In the meantime, the army of Bhima of unequalled strength, was rallied gradually by Hari, the famous friend of his, who possessed great valour and who thoroughly effected a blockade to the circle of hostile chiefs.

V. 39. A. Rama’s army, which desired to be augmented by the monkey troops, setting at naught the (inaccessible; mountainous tracts with great enthusiasm, by which (army) chains of mountains were uprooted, hurled off and made to collide with one another.

B. (Bhima’s army) which desired to be increased by ill-equipped (lit. naked) soldiers, by which the land belonging to the enemy was thrown into confusion and the elephant troops in which were annihilated dashing upon one another when urged to speed.

V. 40. A. (Rama’s army)— very brilliant, in the neighbourhood of which Raksasas were moving about in great excitement, by which even the mountains were spilt up by means of large shafts, by which the whole host of the ten-headed monster's offsprings were dispersed, and in whose (heart) very high hopes were raised.

B. (Bhima’s army) — frightful, which was agreeable to those people who were disaffected on account of taxation, which rent the surface of the earth by its immense cavalry, which was, (however), in a chaotic condition, where happiness was at an end, which was without a leader, whose usefulness was gone, whose mind rose up and was greatly agitated, and which had no chariots (as a military equipment).  

V. 41 A. (Rama’s army) — which was quite impervious, with its array of foot-soldiers, treated with filial affection and which repeatedly threw off obstruction to each other, acting like Destiny itself, intent on destroying lives.

B. (Bhima’s army) — blocked up with the infantry belonging to (Hari’s) sons which, as if through Destiny being intent on destroying lives, caused obstruction to each other, now and again.

V. 42. A. (Rama's army) which caused rivers of blood to flow on, which was strewn over with the heads and trunks of the vanquished forces, and by which great archers were hurled into the jaws of Death (lit. the buffalo-riding god).

B. (Bhima’a army) in which streams of blood continued to flow, which was covered with the heads and trunks (of dead bodies) shaking to and fro, the soldiers of which, riding buffaloes, were hurling stupendous arrows.  

V 43. A. There, in the midst of the demons, the enemies of the universe, shone Laksmana, the brother of the blessed one (Rama), by whom the most valiant Kumbhakarna was shorn of his greatness, on his body being cut to pieces.

B. There shone the son of the blessed one (Ramapala), who had his samantas to protect him against all the enemies put together (or to protect the world against all enemies) and who, as liberal in his gifts as Karna, exhausted the golden pitchers by his war-time gifts.

V. 44. A. The world-conquering lance (Sakti) of (Ravana), the conqueror of Indra, stuck to (the heart of) Laksmana, his (Rama’s) younger brother. The latter, too, fainted therewith and laid his body prostrate on the ground.

B. The world-domineering power of the moral victor (Ramapala) attached itself even to his son; and the latter, elevated by that (power), implanted his lustre on earth (or imprinted his glory on earth).
 
V. 45-46. A. Whereupon the enemy, who was the conqueror of Indra and who assumed illusory appearances, was led to the abode of Death (i.e. killed) by that valorous Laksmana, who was cured of the swoon by the son of the Wind-god (Hanumat), who had uprooted and carried away the large mountain (Gandhamadana), having walked (thither) with very great speed, and provided for the life-restoring (lit. supreme) drug (growing therein).

Image
Hanuman fetches the herb-bearing mountain, in a print from the Ravi Varma Press, 1910s

-- Hanuman, by Wikipedia


B. Then the enemy (Bhima), (hitherto) victorious through his (friend) Hari’s valour, was led to the execution-ground by that person (Vittapala) with all auspicious marks and with his perplexity (or confusion) removed, when he, the very source of the world’s life, proceeding with very great prowess, had deposed and then drawn (to his side) great kings and thus administered an excellent remedy against the enemies.

V. 47. A. Some calamity, which was well understood by Rama and which was only (faintly) guessed by the ten-headed monster, grew thick. For, the latter had to see with his own eyes the disaster of the severing of his own heads (as they were cut off one by one).

B. With regard to Bhima, a calamitous state, which he eminently deserved, was conceived by Ramapala. For he (Bhima) had to observe with his own eyes the incidence of beheading of his own kith and kin.

V. 48-9. A. Then by him (Rama) was caused the death of the king of Lanka — who, clotted with the thick mass of blood streaming out from the line of the hollows of his severed necks, was an object of a great merriment to the flock of birds (or the multitude of gods) sporting in the sky — whose relations had already been slain — and who, having his strength in his Chandrahasa sword, was putting up a terrible fight.

B. Then by him (Ramapala) was surely brought about the death of that wretched king (Bhima), who was the object marked by the flight of the multitude of arrows flashing through the sky and was clotted with the thick mass of blood streaming out from the tubular passage of his severed neck, whose relations had all been put to death in his presence — who (still) maintained the strength of his sword and gave a terrible battle (or uttered an unspeakable and terrible abuse).

Here ends Canto II of the Ramacarita, called4 [Probably the chapter was named “the slaughter of the enemy by Rama”.]  

_______________

Notes:

1. MS [x]. The text here is restored with the help of the commentary. The word [x] is added to meet the exigencies of metre.

2. MS [x]

3. MS [x]

4. MS [x]

5. MS [x]

6. MS [x]

1. MS [x]

2. MS [x]

3. HS [x]

4. MS [x]

5. MS [x]

6. MS [x]

7. After this word the commentary has the following unnecessary words [x].

1. MS [x]

1. HS [x]

2. HS [x]

3. HS omits this word [x] here.

4. HS [x]

5. HS [x]

6. HS [x] '[x]' is a Prakritised form of '[x]'

7. HS [x]

8. Restored from the commentary.

9. HS [x]

1. MS [x]

2. MS [x]

3. May also be read as [x].

4. May also be read as [x].

5. HS [x]

6. MS [x]

7. HS reads [x] in place of [x].

8. HS [x]

1. The word [x] is omitted in MS.

2. This portion is restored with the help of the commentary. The MS has inserted here, apparently wrongly, a portion of the next verse.

3. MS [x]

4. MS [x]

5. MS and HS [x]

6. MS [x]

7. MS [x]

8. MS [x]

9. MS [x]

1. HS [x]

2. MS [x]

3. HS [x]

4. MS [x]

5. MS [x]

6. HS [x]

1. MS has '[x]' before '[x]' which seems unnecessary and mars the metre.

2. MS [x]

3. HS [x]

4. MS [x]

1. The whole paragraph from here forms a preamble to the next group of nine verses.

2. MS [x]

3. MS [x]

4. MS inserts [x], which are unnecessary.

5. Restored from the commentary by HS.

6. MS [x]

7. MS [x]

8. HS [x]

1. MS [x]

2. These words are somewhat difficult to interpret.

3. MS [x]

4. MS [x]

5. Can the second line of verse 12 be interpreted as follows: -- "by whom the large rooms (of the residences) of gods (living in mountains) were caused to be removed into waters on account of the digging up of the hard hills"? -- R.G.B.

6. MS [x]

7. MS [x]

8. MS [x]

9. MS [x]

10. MS [x]

1. MS [x]

2. MS [x]

3. MS [x]

4. MS [x]

5. MS [x]

6. MS [x]

7. MS [x]. [x] is from the root [x] ([x]).

1. MS [x]

2. MS [x]

3. MS [x]

4. MS [x]

5. MS [x]

6. MS [x]

7. MS [x]

1. MS [x]

2. MS [x]

3. MS [x]

4. MS repeats the word [x]

5. HS restored this verse with the help of the commentary.

6. MS [x]

7. MS [x]. It does not appear how in the first case, [x], as applied to the water of the ocean, means [x].

1. HS restored this verse with the help of the commentary.

2. HS [x], which does not seem to be a grammatically correct form.

3. HS [x]

4. MS [x]

5. MS [x], HS [x].

6. HS [x]

7. HS [x]

8. MS [x]

9. HS has here [x].

1. HS [x]

2. HS [x]

3. MS [x]

4. MS [x]

5. MS [x]

1. HS [x]

2. MS [x]

1. MS [x]. But the last word cannot be syntactically connected.

2. MS [x]

3. MS [x]

1. MS [x]

2. MS [x]

3. MS [x]

4. MS [x]

1. MS [x]

2. MS [x], which is also a correct form.

3. MS [x]

1. MS [x]

2. According to HS this [x] is superfluous. But the division of the words should be [x] [x] ([x]), etc.

1. MS [x]

2. MS [x], which is corrected by HS as [x]

3. MS [x]

4. MS [x]

5. MS [x]

6. The commentator refers to the science of [x] in his alternative explanation here. Cf. Kautilya's definition of the term -- "[x]" -- Arthasastra, Book I, 14.

7. Should it be [x]?

8. MS [x]

1. MS [x]

2. MS [x]

3. MS [x]

4. HS [x]

5. HS [x]

6. MS [x]

7. MS [x]

8. MS [x]

9. MS [x]

1. MS [x]

2. MS [x]

3. MS has a redundant [x] here.

4. [x]

5. MS [x].

6. The text is corrupt as remarked by HS. The verse as it stands in the commentary runs thus: -- [x]

1. MS [x]

2. MS has [x], which ought to be corrected into [x]. The reading of HS and his footnote are unwarranted.

3. MS [x]

4. This seems to be a quotation from Yadava's lexicons. HS reads [x].

1. HS [x]

2. MS [x]

3. Is the word [x]?

4. MS [x]

5. MS [x]. This is corrected from the commentary in which it is [x]. [x] here gives no sense. In the corrected copy the reading [x] is retained after some.

1. HS [x]

2. MS [x]

3. Because the Kalpa or injunction of Sastras is that warriors fallen in battle are destined to go to heaven and enjoy celestial damsels.

1. MS [x]

1. [x] (N.G.B.), i.e. one having a bright future.

2. [x] (R.G.B.), i.e. Bhima surrendered without making any efforts of his body and arms for escape or fight.

3. "[x]" -- Perhaps it means, in the case of Bhima, 'eluding the vigilance of the enemies'. I confess I cannot get a clearer meaning. The fact is that Bhima was taken a prisoner. But he must have escaped because he died only after he had put up a tough fight (verse 49); and this verse, I take it, states how he, a crafty enemy ([x]: v. 46), effected his escape by first "surrendering his person" and then "eluding the vigilance of the enemies". -- (N.G.B.)

1. To hazard a conjecture, Bhima's elder brother's son was none other than Hari, who is mentioned in the next verse as his great ally, who replenished and reorganised his army.

2. MS [x]

3. MS [x], which is accepted by HS, but which makes the metre defective by the long vowel.

1. Is the reading here [x] (?) (R.G.B.)

2. [x] ([x]) Vide Panini [x].

3. Metre defective. If two syllables are missing from the first half, then it would be an [x]. If, on the other head, two letters are considered redundant in the second half, then it would be a [x]. So far as we can see, [x] in [x] (2nd half) seems to be redundant.

4. MS [x]

1. [x] -- (R.G.B.)

2. (i) [x] (N.G.B.).

(ii) [x] (R.G.B.) i.e. which was however arrayed after being very highly agitated and in which carts (of a special nature having two side-planks) were used instead of chariots. It may be noted also that the poet speaks of [x] in v. 39. [x] and [x] in v. 40 and [x] in v. 41, thus completing his picture of the [x] of Bhima.

1. MS [x]. It may also be read as [x]. But the metre requires one long vowel here.

2. MS [x]

3. MS [x]. The letter [x] before [x] appears to be redundant.

4. i.e. [x], grammatically connected group of more than three verses.

1. MS [x]

2. [x]: (R.G.B.)

1. MS has after [x] the additional word [x] which is redundant.

2. Inserted to make the metre faultless.

1. MS [x]

2. MS [x]

3. A group of two verses.

1. HS's restoration of the letter [x] before [x] violates the metre.

2. [x], i.e. a union of chopped-off heads of his kinsmen (R.G.B.).

3. MS [x]

4. MS [x]

5. MS [x]

1. MS reads [x]. The reading seems to have been [x] which is an adjective to [x]. To connect it with [x] in the previous verse appears to be far-fetched.

2. MS has here [x], which is apparently copied from verse 1 of the next chapter.

3. [x] (Panini 6.3.105) [x]

4. Probably the chapter was named "the slaughter of the enemy by Rama".
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 33177
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: The Ramacaritam of Sandhyakaranandin

Postby admin » Tue May 18, 2021 4:35 am

Canto III: “The Return of Rama"

V. 1. A. Having drawn her (near him), he (Rama) accepted, when obtained from the fire-god, his dearest wife (Sita), not born from (any human) womb and the (prospective) mother of (his) children, who was pure though she long dwelt in the land of the Raksasas.

B. Having extracted (the enemy’s) wealth, he (Ramapala), of pure conduct, having made (adequate) arrangement for protection, occupied after a long time that dearest land (of Varendri), the place of birth of his people, which was acquired by conquest and which was his own.

V. 2-5. A. (Sita) — whose purity of thought was vouched for by the gods, doing good to all — associated with them were Brahma (lit, the father of Sarasvati), Siva the terrible Lord, and Visnu, who is the Lord of bliss or protection; —  

(Among whom were) the twelve Adityas appearing together with their consorts (or appearing in person), the most excellent gods shining high above; and who, being (the eye of the world) and the direct source of cognition, are the objects of the highest adoration; —

Those deities of luminous form, the eleven Rudras, joined by Skanda with Vinayaka, by the (eight) Vasus, and by the group of deities, the (ten) Visvas of far-extended sphere —

(the gods viz.) the presiding deities of the quarters, who were present there, having as their residence the altars in the lofty temples of that city (Lanka), where the houses (after the death of Ravana) were not threatened from any quarter.


B. (Varendri)— whose internal purity or tranquility was guaranteed— by the kings, having as their associates Srihetvisvara, Ksemesvara and Chandesvara, who were rendering good services; —

By those chief potentates, who were shining in the height of their glory and looked like the veritable twelve Adityas in their own orbit and who, commanding the greatest (public) confidence (lit. being the very basis of acts of confidence), were entitled to the highest honour; —

By those formidable chiefs of well-known character, eleven in number, who were joined by that king, Skanda (by name) having a distinguished general, and who extended their position of authority by means of wealth of all kinds;—

(The kings)— who were the occupants of well-decorated places inside the lofty palaces of cities, the situation of which was quite safe and fulfilled the expectations of those (supplicants) who came to them (for help).

V. 6. A. (Sita) whose extreme faithfulness (to her lord) was established by the Brahmanas, endowed with the (six) superhuman powers, and at the same time most placid, and also by the great sages, the authoritative expounders of the Vedic lores in all their branches.

B. (Varendri), where excellences in the holy vows (of truth, non-violence etc.) were observed by the Brahmanas, who would be likened with the Maharsis, the great expounders ...

V. 7. A. (Sita) who got stupefied even in the matter of her ordinary practices or in her (present) condition— round whom gathered the (storm of) passion of one (i.e. Ravana) whose (only) pleasure consisted in the oppression of the world -- who was (thus) doing great good to the world -- and whose great glory was proclaimed loudly by the (beatings of) drums.

B. (Varendri) -- which had elephants of the Mandra type imported (into its forests) -- where in the great monastery at Jagaddala kindly love for all was found accumulated -- which country bore (in its heart) the image of (Bodhisattva) Lokesa -- and whose great glory was still more increased (or pronounced) by (the presence of) the great (heads of monasteries) and the (images of) Tara (the Buddhist goddess).

V. 8. A. (Sita) who was the abode of virtues beyond measure and became the impregnable house of truth and right conduct, whose pure character was declared by those who had a very high reputation for their holy deeds.

B. (Varendri) which is a land of virtues beyond measure and which was reborn as a place of ... whose purity was indicated by those...

V. 9. A. (Sita), who was born in the home of the Vedic lore (Brahman) (or born out of the sacrificial ground), who fell unconscious as the effect of the scorching poison of (humiliation attended with scandal) and became thin and emaciated and who, on account of her very fearful habitation (in the midst of the demons), wearing away flesh, which admitted of no sleep, felt her body, (once) so crimson-coloured, like a great burden.

B. (Varendri) — which was the birth-place of Brahmana families, which flourished on account of its town of Skanda-nagara, and (as such) was held in high esteem and which contained in it the city of Sonitapura crowded by the (images of) gods, installed in temples, (which looked quite gay) with lotuses of very large sizes.

V. 10. A. (Sita) — who was in all respects as holy as the inestimable stream of waters of Ganga at the source, and who was internally pure and bright through the “great sacrifice” (which means the great knowledge of truth) leading to final release from rebirth.

B. (Varendri) — which, with the glorious streams of Ganga and Karatoya flowing on either side, was the holiest place and which was pure and spotless on account of its having the great place of pilgrimage or (landing ghata), called Apunarbhava, in its very heart.

V. 11. A. (Sita) who, moreover, became very thin and emaciated through fear of the huge hordes of the Kaccha country (of the south), and was able to raise herself only with the help of her female companion (Sarama) -- (or on whom blackness was visibly growing up) -- and who was found in the Asoka grove, surrounded by the senseless Raksasas, (lit. eaters of raw flesh).

B. (Varendri) -- the country in which, moreover, there were large marshy lands and in which originated the rivers Balabhi and Kali -- the excessively weak stream,-- and also which (country) was surrounded by many well-known trees and which contained Asoka groves.

V. 12. A. (Sita who was meditating on Rama),— the most pre-eminent person, as (if) made up of the dense rows of cloud, whose mouth was ceaselessly musical on account of sweet (sound of his) throat and who had (his belly marked with) beautiful waving folds of skin; -- the meditation on her Lord being accompanied by a tremor in her Bilva-like breasts.

B. (Varendri possessing an excellent garden) with closely planted edible Kanda roots, the entrance of which was resonant with the ceaseless warblings of the cuckoos, which was shaking with its large Lakucha and Sriphala trees, and which had its delicious Lavalas, moving to and fro.

V. 13. A. (Rama) as one growing in strength and (exquisitely beautiful) with his lips sharing the glow of new shoots of leaves, with his eyes pouring out, as it were, a shower of nectar (or water), with his curly hair playing on his forehead, and who was resting on the waves of his deep sighs —and further as one who, with the (strength) of fighting many an elephant, surpassed Indra in energetic action.

B. (The garden) bearing grandeur of foliage, with birds moving about in its midst, raining showers of nectar on the eyes (of beholders), which was clung to by the waves of wind carrying fragrance spread out in all directions, in which there were (hovering) bees that were restless, which contained many a Nagaranga tree, and which (as such) excelled even Indra’s garden (Nandana).  

V. 14-15. A. (Rama) with whom her union (in spirit) was established— by the “accessory” sentiments surging within her, associated with which were sloth, sickness of heart, fatigue, despondency and sadness, and which started with (apparent) insanity, insensibility, reflection, anxiety and self-disparagement, as well as by the external manifestations, in which was (evident) the great thrill of joy (all over the body) and among which were the actions of mind, intellect, body and speech — all of them expressing great distress.

B. (The garden) where mutual intercourse was carried on (by all sorts of people, such as) the gay voluptuaries, by those people who had their sloth, sickness of heart, fatigue, despondency and sadness, and by wise men, who destroyed (all such afflictions as) insanity, insensibility, reflection, anxiety and depression of spirits, as well as by persons endowed with good virtues whose (every) action by mind, thought, words and body struck out sins.

V. 16. A. (Sita) bearing in her mind her beloved Lord Rama, who was adored by gods and who was sustaining his life which was fixed upon the place of his beloved (Sita) and which was (considered) an evil, it being joyless and quite pitiable.

B. (Varendri) containing the excellent garden, which did good to the heart (of the spectators), which was highly valued on account of the presence of sweet things (or Amalaki trees etc.) it contained, which was adorned by Karana trees, the water in which was enclosed by the Priyala plants and which was unique of its kind.

V. 17. A. (Sita) who was regarded as the most shining crest-jewel of the line of Iksvaku on account of her grace, the fascinating charm of which was hailed or esteemed in numerous ways by the host of other kings (assembled in her svayamwara meeting) and which was further augmented by her high lineage.

B. (Varendri) which was (esteemed as) the sparkling crest-jewel of the earth because of (the presence of) Laksmi (Beauty) whose lovely form was beheld in the paddy plants of various kinds, which was further expanded by the fine bamboo clumps, and which had (as additional charm) the sugarcane plants that were flourishing excellently there.  

V. 18. A. (Sita) the acquisition of whose precious property (Cudamani) came from the sacrifice of (Indra) the mighty conqueror of the demon named Bala— who lay down on the earth, who was destined always to accomplish the greatest good of the earth, and who owed her birth (directly) to mother Earth.

B. (Varendri) which owed the acquirement of its wealth to vigorous campaigns by its army (or to the extension of its granaries of corns), which produced priyangu creepers in abundance and had vast fields for growing fine ela (cardamom) plants, which was (at last) an afflicted land.

V. 19. A. (Sita) who was the only instrument for the fulfilment of the task of the host of gods which was unequalled on earth in the point of its fruitfulness, and who destined not to remain (ever) in the country of the meanest enemies, (therefore) attained fruitfulness though she was in this world with her face wet with tears.

B. (Varendri) which had all its important regions filled up with crops and water and had, as their ornaments, the groves of Sudha or the milk — hedge plants and Asama trees, and areca-nut-trees — and in which the people were (always) with juicy mouth, as this was the congenial soil for cocoanut trees in the world.

V. 20. A. (Sita) who was wearing garlands of large Malati, fine Nagakesara and excellent Vakula flowers, by whom was caused to all in this world the greatest of rejoicings, and who caused the destruction of the enemies (Raksasas) who were given to much drinking.

B. (Varendri) which had elevated lands bearing excellent flowers, namely, large Malati, fine Nagakesara and the finest Kesara (i.e., Vakula) — and which was presenting excellent fragrance diffused by Madhu (Asoka), and Parijata (trees) and Lavanga (creepers) with their fine foliage.  

V. 21. A. (Sita) who was carrying (in her hand) a Kesara flower, with bees hovering (near) on account of its very sweet fragrance, which was reddish-white as (her own) lotus-like palm, and who was retaining only a streak of her (former) lovely features which, one can not set a limit to by words for their symmetry.

B. (Varendri) which had Kesara trees, near which bees hovered on account of their very sweet fragrance and which were reddish-white like lotus-like palms (?) and which also possessed a cluster with a nice symmetry of Madhuka trees which could not be counted by words.

V. 22. A. (Sita) whose beauty resembling that of golden ketaka was terror-stricken— who was intensely adored all over the world — and whose breath was as cool and fragrant as the water abounding in lotuses, red and blue.

B. (Varendri)— whose beauty was enhanced by slightly opened Kanaka (i.e., Dhustura or Champaka) and Ketaka flowers, which was the land favourable to the growth of flowers of endless varieties and where blew a breeze which was cool and fragrant, because of the presence of water with plenty of lotuses, red and blue.  

V. 23. A. (Sita) the grace of whose person possessed the exquisite charms of the moon's digit, and the breadth of whose breasts, high, plump and closely set, would suggest simile with a pair of golden pitchers joined together.

B. (Varendri) the beauty of the cities of which was charming on account of the excessive grace (of symmetry) in the rows of the white palaces, where the huge expanses of clouds stack to the extremities of the groups of golden pitchers placed high (on the palace-tops).  

V. 24. A. (Sita) whose hair resembled fine peacock’s tail, the luster of whose forehead resembled the brilliance of the moon, whose figure (lit. limbs) appeared drooping down, who had thinness in waist and the grace in the pair of whose eyes, reaching right up to the ears, turned downward.

B. (Varendri)— which, by its beautiful art, eclipsed the fame of the country of Kuntala, by which the splendour of Lata was bedimmed, before which Anga was bowing low, by which the artful glances of Karnata were turned down, and by which the thinness or slenderness of Madhya-desa was maintained.  

V. 25. A. (Sita) who shone with her good and bright line of hair, who possessed folds of skin in her belly not separated from each other, who had her fore-arms as soft as the fibre of a lotus, and who possessed a (beautiful) expanse of well developed hips.

B. (Varendri) — which was full of festivities on account of the excellent worship of the goddess Uma, which was bearing an ever-lasting royal dynasty (?), which was thoroughly purged of all evils, and which was a country having a great height and expanse.  

V. 26 . A. (Sita) who had the charming swan’s gait (or the gait of a huge she-elephant), whose hips were broad and had a pleasing sight, who had a great and sacred history and has eclipsed even the Lord of the night i.e. the moon (in glory or loveliness), and who excelled by her own eyes (the beauty of) the blue lotuses.

B. (Varendri) where there were large tanks, the favourite resorts of the people, where large and swiftly moving clouds gave abundant rain, where the king, by his righteous valour, granted joy (and relief) to the injured, and which country conquered by a mere glance the whole circle of the earth.  

V. 27. A. (Sita) who, (roughly) handled as she was, by the wicked (Raksasas), was led out of compassion by the tender support of the hands of her Lord, and who, therefore, felt greatly honoured — and whose sorrow due to the enemy’s fire of passion was removed at once.

B. (Varendri)— which, oppressed as she had been with cruel taxation, was (treated) with tenderness on account of the king’s adoption of mild taxation, and which country, being brought under cultivation, flourished, and whose affliction due to the (wholesale) massacre and arson caused by the enemies, was removed at once.  

V. 28. A. (Sita) to whose feet the high-born and pious people at once made many obeisances.

B. (Varendri) where elevation to high positions was then and there obtained by the people of the native land, who were of good character.

V. 29. A. He (Rama) made Lanka appear like the peak of Meru — (Lanka) which equalled Amaravatl, which was made the abode of many persons of great affluence and in which place distress was unknown, and which was crowded by gods, who are gratified with the clarified butter offered (to them in sacrifices), unobstructed.

B. He (Ramapala) built the city of (Ramavati) which rivalled Amaravati, which was resonant with the music of tabor of many varieties that was (specially) practised in Varendri, which was peopled by learned men devoted to truth, and which was without any obstacles (or by learned men who were content with gifts, unsolicited and unobstructed).

V. 30. A. (Lanka) which was the dwelling place of Raksasas, but which was yet without any talk about impious conduct, in which place men felt enraptured with conversation held among themselves, (as it) granted protection to all, and which place counted among its residents the exalted class of gods.

B. (Ramavati) which was the home of pious souls, having no talk about any unfair transaction or litigation, which city, through its great figures known in history, assured security to all, and which had a series of lofty temples of gods.  

V. 31. A. (Lanka) — which, attended to (by him), appeared as the veritable city of the lord of gods as it contained abundant clusters of jewels, which, having among its residents many charming young women, was so very auspicious, and which was bathed as it were in the nectar of the benign government of Vibhisana.

Vibhishana is the younger brother of Ravana, the king of Lanka in the ancient Indian epic Ramayana. Though a Rakshasa himself, Vibhishana deserted Ravana and joined Rama's army. Later, when Rama defeated Ravana, Rama crowned Vibhishana as the king of Lanka before returning to Ayodhya.

-- Vibhishana, by Wikipedia


B. (Ramavati) which was carrying an immense mass of gems and was liked by all as the city of gods and wealthy residents, which was so very auspicious, and which, after it had been rid of the frightful rule, was cleansed, as it were, by an ambrosial bath.  

V. 32. A. And he (Rama), by whom the monkey chief (Sugriva) was surrounded with immense wealth and raised to a high dignity, made Lanka appear like the peak of the Meru (mountain) as it contained rows of houses made of gold.

B. He (Ramapala) after having established the chief Hari in a position of great influence, also built (Ramavati) as a city of rows of palaces with plenty of gold therein, and, therefore, made it appear like the peak of the Meru.  

V. 33-34. A. (At that palace which was the very source of joy) on account of the ornaments set with diamonds, lapis lazuli, pearls, emeralds, rubies and sapphires, with a network of shoots of rays being beautifully diffused into the sky— and with articles (of furniture) made of gold with fine artistic designs, and also many charming necklaces with central gems and pure pearls of round shape.  

V. 35-36. A-B. Also on account of many variegated costly garments of fine texture, and also musk, black aloe, sandal, saffron and camphor —and (again) on account of the pleasing notes of the different musical instruments which were sonorous, deep and sweet, and which produced a full effect through the acquisition of the harmony with the vocal music and which excelled (even) the performances of Tumburu, the celestial musician.  

V. 37. A.-B. Also on account of the youthful heavenly courtezans who had great passion of love (surging in their breast), and who were dancing passionately while they were wearing their (suitable) apparels and while their jewelled anklet-bells were tinkling sweetly on.

V. 38. A-B. Also on account of the large number of territories which were being enjoyed in due seasons, which became highly productive and which had (as their distinctive features) lines of thousands of impetuously sporting she-buffaloes, the exultant bulls and milch cows.

V. 39-40. A. Here (at Lanka) in a palace crowded by the Raksasas that was built up by Visvakarman,-- which attained perfection of grandeur and where no fraud was being practised, and which place was the one source of gaieties, being furnished with the gems of all sorts, luxuries of many kinds and many nice things for diversion and merriment (as described before), which were respectfully presented by the kings,— the two mighty chiefs, (Rama and Sugriva), like the twin gods, Asvins, met each other and shone for a long time in each other's close embrace.


Vishwakarma or Vishvakarman is a craftsman deity and the divine architect of the gods in contemporary Hinduism. In the early texts, the craftsman deity was known as Tvastar and the word "Vishvakarma" was originally used as an epithet for any powerful deity. However, in many later traditions, Vishvakarma became the name of the craftsman god.

Vishwakarma crafted all of the chariots of the gods and weapons including the Vajra of the god Indra. Vishvakarma was related to the sun god Surya through his daughter Samjna. According to the legend, when Samjna left her house due to Surya's energy, Vishvakarma reduced the energy and created various other weapons using it. Vishvakarma also built various cities like Lanka, Dwarka and Indraprastha. According to the epic Ramayana, the vanara (forest-man or monkey) Nala was the son of Vishvakarma, created to aid the avatar Rama.

-- Vishvakarma, by Wikipedia


B. Here (at Ramavati) the two kings (Ramapala and Hari), who were rich in cavalry and very powerful, met together and shone for a long time in each other’s close embrace in the palace, full of gold and built with all sorts of works of art— and which attained perfection ... (the same as in A.).  

V. 41. A. By that king of sweet disposition (Rama), the union of three, (Sugriva, Angada and Vibhisana), as the recipient of his blessings, was placed amidst divine showers of flowers over the heads of the host of kings.  

B. By that resplendent one (Ramapala), with the movements of his armies in every direction (or with the support of the) armies of his allies, the temples of Siva in groups of three were given for the benefit of the learned on the tops of a chain of hills.  

V. 42. A. That King, Rama made the ocean itself, with the great construction of a causeway with the chains of large mountains and palm trees, filled up like an ordinary tank.

B. That king (Ramapala) constructed great works of public utility in the shape of large lakes with tall palm trees and lines of hillocks on their border, so as to make them look like veritable seas.  

V. 43. A. By him (Rama), who was capable of bearing the burden of heaven with perfect ease, this earth was made full of many greatly enjoyable objects and rendered light in weight by (bringing about) stability in the Great-forest area (of the South) and free from all evils.

B. By him (Ramapala) assuming the burden of the king of the Naka dynasty with ease, and possessing the necessary strength for affording protection,— this earth (heavy) with the too huge Naga capital was made lighter after the Nagas had been extirpated (from its surface).

V. 44. A. Who (Rama) was propitiated for his own protection by (Indra), the guardian of the Eastern quarter, who rode on the excellent elephant (Airavata), by means of his armour, as well as by offering his own chariot.

B. Who (Ramapala) was conciliated by the Varman king of the Eastern country (i.e., of East Bengal) for his own safety, by offering his own chariots and also his excellent elephant (force).

V. 45. A. He (Rama) with his elation checked, treated with kindness his wife, who would be the mother of (heroic) sons (who would be) ornaments to the world; and having entered into war stamped out the demons and gave protection to the entire world.

B. He (Ramapala) did favour to the vanquished king of Utkala, who was born in the lineage of the Nagas (or Soma or Ganga), the ornament of Bhava (Siva), and rescued the whole world (from the terror of) Kalinga after having extirpated those robbers (of that place).

V. 46. A. That king (Rama), when his shoulder was fastened and pressed by the serpents (i.e., serpent-noose), was pleased by the king of birds (Garuda) who, with a will to serve him, came to his rescue.

B. That king (Ramapala), when he with a division of his army thrown into confusion was checkmated by means of a (superior) elephant force, was satisfied by "the lord of cavalry”, who with a desire to please him rendered him great assistance (at that time).  

V. 47. A. Did not the king or Vibhisana4 [This seems to refer to the consecration of Vibhisana as king of Lanka by Rama and the conciliation of the subjects by the new king, as described in the Yuddha-kanda of the Ramayana.] who conquered passion, abstained from the objects of sense, such as rupa etc., and was to be treated with high consideration attain the glory of him (Rama (?)), striving to govern his subjects universal satisfaction.

B. Did not the king (the great ally of Ramapala)— who had returned from Kamarupa and other countries conquered by him and as such was a fit recipient of honours,— receive honours from that king (Ramapala), who restrained pride for the protection of his subjects in every quarter?

V. 48. A. Thus, that (king, Rama), having taken her (Sita) with him returned to Ayodhya — which was (1) fit to be enjoyed by the king of kings, and (2) was immensely rich on account of its various hidden treasures, and was like Alaka which was (1) fit to be enjoyed by Kubera, the Lord of the Yaksas and was (2) excessively rich on account of Sevadhi (treasures), and which was full of young women2. [The adjectives are to be taken with the two, viz. Ayodhya and Alaka, and to be explained in the two different ways.]

B. Thus having occupied that country (Varendri) that (king, Ramapala) reached the city of Ramavati3 [The adjectives also apply to Ramavati in the same sense as when used with Ayodhya (in A).] which was unassailable and appeared like Alaka, which was fit to be enjoyed by (Kubera), the lord Yaksas and was excessively rich on account of its Sevadhi.

Here ends the third Canto entitled “The Return of Rama".

_______________

Notes:

1. MS [x]

2. [x] (N.G.B.)

3. [x] (R.G.B.)

4. MS [x]

5. The form of writing the word [x] is peculiar in MS.

1. MS [x]

2. MS [x]

3. HS [x]

1. [x] (R.G.B.)

2. [x] (R.G.B.)

1. HS's reading of the verse violates the metre. He takes [x] as part of the second pada.

2. HS [x]

1. [x] (R.G.B.)

2. [x] (R.G.B.). In this case [x] may be construed with [x].

1. [x] (R.G.B.)

1. MS [x]

2. Is this city in any way connected with the name of Skanda in verse 4 above?

1. This town of Sonitapura is another name of the older city of Kotivarsha of the visaya of the same name. Hemacandra gives another synonym for it viz. Banapura. The modern name of Bangarh (=[x]) refers to that part of the country in the Dinajpur District which is situated north of Rajshabi in North Bengal. Cf. [x]

2. MS [x]

3. MS [x]

4. HS [x]

5. [x] etc. (N.G.B.)

6. [x] etc. (N.G.B.)

1. Metre defective in this reading.

2. HS [x]

3. HS reads [x] which seems to be a wrong reading.

1. MS [x]

2. MS [x]

3. MS [x]

1. Metre somewhat defective. The first two lines seem to have formed an Arya ([x]).

2. MS [x]

3. MS [x]

4. MS reads something like [x] -- R.G.B.

1. [x] -- R.C.M.

2. MS [x]

1. MS [x], HS [x]

1 HS [x]

1. [x] -- R.G.B. in the case of the reading [x]

2. MS [x]

1. MS [x]

1. MS [x]

2. MS [x]

1. [x] R.G.B. (i.e. which possessed flowers of many varieties).

2. MS [x], HS [x]

1. [x] -- R.G.B.

2. MS [x]

1. MS [x]

1. This is a remnant of an Arya, which seems to have been included in the aforesaid kulaka, and the metre is not also ascertainable. Taken with Sita and Varendri, it gives much better sense than it would with Ramavati and Lanka in the following kulaka.

1. MS has a redundant [x] after [x].

2. MS [x]. This reading with [x] may be defended by such uses as [x]: under the rule [x] -- N.G.B.

1. MS [x] for [x]

2. [x] is inserted to make the metre faultless.

1. MS [x]

2. MS [x], HS [x]

3. MS [x]

1. MS [x]

2. HS [x], but there is no necessity of supplying [x] after [x].

3. HS [x]

4. MS [x]

5. MS [x]

1. MS [x]

2. MS [x]

3. MS has [x]. HS reads [x]. Another reading [x] (instead of [x] in the MS) may be suggested. [x]: (surrounded) -- N.G.B.

4. Another way of translating the second line of the verse may be: -- "on account of the plently of objects of enjoyment which were to be enjoyed in due season for which there was a large number of producers or suppliers".

1. MS [x]

2. MS [x], HS [x]

3. HS [x]; [x] is not quite clear in the MS.

1. Metre obscure, owing to the missing of some letters in the first half of the verse. MS [x], HS [x].

2. MS [x]

1. HS [x]

2. The letter [x] is not quite distinct.

3. MS [x]

4 MS [x], HS [x]

5. MS [x]

6 MS [x]

7. HS [x] (?)

1. [x] and [x] are the two dynasties mentioned in the Vamana Purana: -- [x]. See also Pargiter's Dynasty of the Kali age.

2. HS [x], which is not a correct form.

1. MS [x]

1. MS [x]

2. [x]: R.G.B.

1. MS [x].

2. HS [x]. His interpretation of [x] as the proper name of a king is quite untenable.

3. If the reading [x] could be replaced by [x], the meaning of the verse would have been clearer.

4. This seems to refer to the consecration of Vibhisana as king of Lanka by Rama and the conciliation of the subjects by the new king, as described in the Yuddha-kanda of the Ramayana.

1. MS [x]. The reading [x] has been adopted, because it removes the metrical defect.

2. The adjectives are to be taken with the two, viz. Ayodhya and Alaka, and to be explained in the two different ways.

3. The adjectives also apply to Ramavati in the same sense as when used with Ayodhya (in A).
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 33177
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: The Ramacaritam of Sandhyakaranandin

Postby admin » Tue May 18, 2021 5:56 am

Canto IV: ‘‘The later career of Rama.”

V. 1. A. That king, Rama, staying there (in Ayodhya), enjoyed long in the company of his lovely spouse by the provision of various sorts of objects of enjoyment -- after his kingdom had been returned to him by his brother (Bharata).

B. That king, Ramapala, with his queen-consort staying there (in Ramavati) enjoyed (peace) for a long period by the formation of different country-tracts (into visayas) after the (burden) of the kingdom had been entrusted by him to his son (or sons). 

V. 2. A. That virtuous consort of the mighty lord, now feeling the pleasure of enjoying the heavenly objects, was not at any place or at any time tolerated by that (king), as having her conduct called in question by wicked persons.

B. The land of Varendri, having (now) the pleasure of enjoyment of the territories of Divya (the Kaivarta chief) was not tolerated by that (king), as having the religious observances (or the vow of Bhiksu) contaminated or impugned by impious people.

V. 3. A. It was with great difficulty that on his command, his brother (Laksmana) promptly and skilfully led the "jewel wombed" daughter of Janaka to the forest, with Sumantra accepting the charioteer's office.

B. With great difficulty, his son, enjoying wise counsel and clinging to filial duty, and acting under his orders, promptly and with cleverness, brought the land of his nativity, full of precious things, under (good) government.

V. 4. A. Then on hearing the command of the king she (Sita) fell into a swoon, and having regained her consciousness, related to Laksmana about her carrying child in her womb, with a heavy flow of tears coming out of her eyes.

B. Then this country (Varendri), with its flow of water coming from the large (lit. kingly) clouds and with its prosperity derived from the strict adherence to the commands of the king, attained a great celebrity and maintained the internal order amongst its people.

V. 5. A. (Sita) with her mind, fixed on (Ramacandra) as the protector from fear, whose lamentation filled with acute grief the entire world, and who possessed a figure which excelled that of the Cupid.

B. (Varendri) wherein an iron rule without fear (of chastisement) prevailed,— where there was no word of lamentation (ever heard) and pride (only) was expressed, and by which the entire world was pleased — and which included in its area the province of Kamarupa, conquered by war (or by Vigrahapaladeva).

V. 6. A. Ramacandra took under his protection that lovely boy (Kusa), with his younger brother, who had sung the history of Rama i.e. the Ramayana, and who, having his sonship recognised, was appointed governor of his state.

B. Ramapala arranged for the protection of Rajyapala (or led Rajyapala to the grand palace) equally with his brother, — the former (i e. Rajyapala) with his pleasing appearance and well-known filial love, having praised the glorious career of Ramapala.

V. 7. A. The Lord of the earth (Rama) was pleased with him in a manner which caused the heart-burning of the enemies’ hearts (lit. tearing enemies’ hearts)— he, being possessed of all the fine arts, gratifying the (Naga) Kumuda, (by name) and bursting open the interior of the rocks by arrows.

B. King Ramapala was pleased with him (his son), unfolding the joy of the earth....

N.B. The suggested meaning may be stated thus:— (Both of them resembled) the moon. With (the moon) the Lord of the universe (Siva) was delighted in a manner which caused heart-burning of the enemies— he (the moon) being one possessed of the (16) digits, causing the night lily to bloom and melting by his rays the particular stones (called moon-gems).  

V. 8. A. The Kala (Purusa) having arrived, (Laksmana) the vanquisher of the conqueror of Indra, whose bond of engagement was violated on account of Durvasas' (importunities), consigned his mortal frame to the river (Saraya) by a staircase filled in with the river-water.

B. When the time was ripe, Mathana, the conqueror of enemies, — who had all remedies to his (bodily) sufferings cut off on account of a wretched habitation— gave up his person in the river by a stair-case which was situated close to Adrisutapura.

V. 9. A. Then realising his self (as no other than Narayana) by the message of Brahman, he, a most charitable lord of earth, made up his mind (to die), with a joyful heart, as his mission (on earth) was fulfilled, and started for the great river (Sarayu).

B. Hearing of this (death of Mathana) while at Mudgiri (i.e. Munghyr) from a Brahmana, the king resolved to die, as his mission (i.e. the deliverance of his fatherland) had been fulfilled, and went to the great river (Ganges)3 [The Sekhasubhodaya has the following lines in a verse about the death of Ramapala in the Ganges: -- [x]] (for self-immolation), giving away wealth in abundance.

V. 10. A. While the crowd of people in great sorrow was weeping, Rama, the Paramatman Himself, returned to his own abode (i.e. attained heaven), having plunged into the holy river (Sarayu) -- alas! that was a sight quite unbearable -- along with all his dependants.

B. While all his subjects were loudly weeping in bitter sorrow, Ramapala, having plunged into the holy water, -- in a manner quite unbearable to his own men suffering from the great affliction -- went to the world according to his own deserts (i.e. died).

V. 11. A. Then his younger brother, Bharata, the saviour (of mankind), who had, since his boyhood, encountered great obstacles to his earthly happiness, attained heaven on his giving up the mortal frame, after having successfully ruled the kingdom.

B. Then the son of this ruler (lit. upholder), Kumara (Kumarapala), the protector, who cut short the happiness of many hostile kings, went to heaven, giving up his mortal frame after having enjoyed his sovereignty.

V. 12. A. His younger brother, Satrughna, the ruler of earth, also died of the great affliction and went to heaven. This (death) of the slayer of the son of Kumbhinasi (i.e. Lavanasura) occurred as the result of the compact (made).

B. Even his (Kumarpala’s) son, Gopala by name, met with his death as the result of his efforts to exterminate enemies. The (death) of this ill-disciplined person, who was the killer of the chief of the elephant force, occurred under the influence of time1. [It appears that king Gopala met with a premature death while encountering either elephant or a crocodile.]

V. 13-15. A. The other worthy and blessed son of that king Rama -- the Incarnation of the Destroyer of demons, Kusa by name, who was, as it were, the very root of joy sprouting up for all his subjects, possessed all auspicious marks of a king, was the best type of man, conquered the group of six internal foes, dispelled the darkness of the world, and was a hero of the Dhirodatta type —became without fear the exhilarating Lord of Earth with ocean as her belt, while extricating the dart of grief resulting from the loss of Rama.

B. Then Madanapala, the other worthy and blessed son of that king, Ramapala, who was born to hammer those veritable sons of Danu, (i.e. the Kaivartas),1 [The other qualifying clauses are the same as in A] became without fear the lord of the sea-girt earth, removing the dart of grief from the earth caused by the demise of Ramapala.

V. 16. A. (To Madana (Cupid) associated with his friend and ally, the Moon,) who with the yajnas (vitanas) held in his honour with ample provisions for abhiseka, is always going forward in filling up all quarters, showing all objects to the fullest advantage, and causing delight to all men by offering protection to the helpless persons.

B. (To Madanapala, as also to king Kusa associated with his kinsman Candra i.e. mandaladhipati Candra, and Candra-ketu respectively as his friend) -- who caused jubilation among the people by spreading out (on a grand scale) the rich collection of materials for the coronation ceremony, being (always) forward in fulfilling all expectations, offering gifts more than necessary, and offering protection to the helpless people.

V. 17. A. (The moon) who (by his rise) obscures with ease the mighty solar disc, which is the invigorator of the great multitude of lotus plants, and who plays the prominent part of being the sole contributor to the eminence of beauty to Mahadeva (the 'moon-crested’ god).

B. (The king) who easily extirpated the whole host of the enemies, going strong with their immense hordes arrayed in lotus-shape, and who was eminently fit to be in sole charge of the fortunes of a jewel among kings.

V. 18. A. (The moon), that great Lord in the midst of a far-extending halo, who shines excessively, whose glory reaches its climax with the touch of night, and whose splendour lies in guarding his own men who are twice-born.

B. (Candra), the ruler of a large mandala (i.e. a mahamandalika), whose great delight lies in the protection of the great multitude of the twice-born class, who shines in the fullest measure, whose greatness, without a touch of fault, reaches the very climax.

V. 19. A. (The moon), who is born of the highest caste (he being the son of Atri and the king of Brahmanas, Dvijaraja), is fit to be worshipped according to the Vedic formulas, is beautiful and of round shape, who is Cupid’s (Madana’s) companion, and is the only hope1 [The moon being the Lord of the plant world is said here to be the "only hope" for the flower plants.] for the effulgent beauty of (Cupid’s flowery) weapons and by whom those who are greatly fatigued, are relieved and held up.

B. (Candra), the son of Suvarnadeva, fit to be adored as a friend and as one who is the hope of Royal fortune, which consists in the splendour of weapons, of charming manners, and well trained in military exercises.  

V. 20. A. (Madana), associated with the moon as his friend and ally, who, that luminary of white rays, is the light of the world, who is (liable to be) assailed by Rahu and who is the physician (in possession) of the secret of the preventing of the opening of the lotuses.

B. (King Madanapala) associated with his kinsman, Candradeva, who (Candradeva) was as strong as a lion-cub, possessed the valour of Arjuna, was, as it were, a light of the world and was a past master in the art of developing (lit. opening up) the resources of wealth.

V. 21. A. Was it not a fact that the fortune of world-conquest came to Madana, who was restored to the beauty of his form through the grace of the lotus-like feet of Candi, and was domineering over all corporeal beings?

B. Was it not a fact that the fortune of world-conquest came to my Lord Madanadeva, backed up as he was by the king of Anga, (or, in the case of Kusa my good-humoured Lord, a king with all raiyangas fully established)— who had fortune in the war assured to him by the grace of Candi’s lotus-like feet (or in the case Madanapala with whom the fortune of Loyalty of Vigrahapala III became mature by the grace of Candi’s lotus-like feet)?

V. 22. A. Kusa, again was (quite happy) with the serpent world which was in complete peace with him, after having accepted, as his wife, Kumuda’s sister, who rose from the river and was fit to bear offspring, which was fearless.

B. Madanapala had his eyes on conciliation without limit, (after) taking over the charge of his own (royal) treasure, which was a delight to the world, and was and adequate to maintain the progeny of the ocean (i.e., the descendants of the Palas) who were fearless.

V. 23 A. That mind-born deity, who was the father of Aniruddha, had weapons of odd number, was the lover of Rati, and made the rustic (or the vulgar) people quite restless, united himself with the supreme season of flowers.

Aniruddha or Aniruddh, meaning "unrestrained", "without obstacles" or "unstoppable" was the son of Pradyumna and Rukmavati and the grandson of Krishna and Rukmini. He is said to have been very much like his grandfather, to the extent that he may be a Jana avatar, the avatar of Vishnu. The four are considered to be Vishnu-tattva or Vishnu's plenary expansions. It has been also used as one of the names of Lord Shiva.

-- Aniruddha, by Wikipedia


Rati is the Hindu goddess of love, carnal desire, lust, passion and sexual pleasure. Usually described as the daughter of Prajapati Daksha, Rati is the female counterpart, the chief consort and the assistant of Kama (Kamadeva), the god of love. A constant companion of Kama, she is often depicted with him in legend and temple sculpture. She also enjoys worship along with Kama.

The Hindu scriptures stress Rati's beauty and sensuality. They depict her as a maiden who has the power to enchant the god of love. When the god Shiva burnt her husband to ashes, it was Rati, whose beseeching or penance, leads to the promise of Kama's resurrection. Often, this resurrection occurs when Kama is reborn as Pradyumna, the son of Krishna. Rati – under the name of Mayavati – plays a critical role in the upbringing of Pradyumna, who is separated from his parents at birth. She acts as his nanny, as well as his lover, and tells him the way to return to his parents by slaying the demon-king, who is destined to die at his hands. Later, Kama-Pradyumna accepts Rati-Mayavati as his wife.

-- Rati, by Wikipedia


B. He (Kusa as well as Madanapala, being like the mind-born deity), always present in the minds of his subjects, having irresistible powers, wielding formidable weapons, a solicitor of people’s affection, made alliance with a great king of godly character, when he (Madanapala) found his rural kingdom thrown into great agitation.

V. 24. A. Who was not shaken off from his inborn fortitude by him (Cupid), who humbled the pride of the young damsels? He, who with manifest strength (or having displayed his valour) is without mercy towards his enemies, has beaten on (hitherto) unbeaten and un-injured.

B. By him (Kusa as well as Madanapala), who had shaken off pride and conceit, no (sign of) irritation or anger was betrayed on account of his innate gravity. He conquered avarice, while always crushing to death, himself remaining unhurt and uninjured, those enemies who showed any sign of strength.

V. 25. A. That you (Kusa as well as Madanapala) are Madana is false. For, while you are non-violent by nature, “Mara” (the violent) is the name of Madana; while you are free from passion, Kama (or passion) is another name of Madana; while you (by means of irrigation) maintain a good and increasing supply of water (which they call Sambara) the latter (Madana) is the sworn enemy of Sambara; while you hold the seven angas (limbs or constituent parts of a State) all intact, the latter has lost all his limbs (Ananga).

Kamadeva, God of Love, Lust and Desire (Other names: Madana)

Kamadeva, Kāma or Manmatha or Madana is the Hindu god of human love or desire, often portrayed along with his female counterpart Rati. Kamadeva is the son of the god Brahma. Pradyumna, the son of Vishnu's avatar Krishna, is regarded as the reincarnation of Kamadeva.

-- Kamadeva, by Wikipedia


V. 26. A-B. By him, again, his enemy was left destitute with all the seven limbs of his state destroyed by means of the former's blissful state-policy, (while Madana had all his limbs destroyed by (the fire from) the eyes of Sankara; (while Madana’s arrows are limited to five), innumerable are the arrows of this (king), that spread death (lit. the state of being resolved into the five elements) among his enemies.

V. 27. A. Balarama, impetuous in his strength, snatched away wine from the mouth of his dear one (Revati); and on account of the insolence of his enemies, his weapon, (the formidable) plough-share was led through the river Yamuna, overcoming its hostile waves; and a human from in distress (which was assumed by the river Yamuna) was dragged (near himself).

B. That (king, Madanapala as well as Kusa), who was rising and was in possession of immense strength cast off the arrogance of the enemies in the front of battle (By him again) were driven away in the river Kalindi the warriors of the front rank who destroyed a large number of the friendly forces.

V. 28. A [???]. This king, Madanapala, who had his food and garments absolutely pure and furnished at the right moment, was another Rama (Balarama) and was (at the same time), not addicted to women (as Balarama was).

Balarama, again, put on a dark-blue garment; his another name was Madanapala; he was the maintainer of the creation (being an incarnation of Visnu) and was attached to his consort (Revati).

B [???]. This king (Kusa) -- the protector of his subjects, -- had absolutely pure food and garments furnished at the right moment. He was not addicted to women, was not indulging in lasciviousness and was the second Rama, (his father being the first).

Rama (his father), again, was (the incarnation of Hari) other than Rama, "the Protector of Kama", had his release from the veil of time well effected, and when bereaved of Laksmi i.e. Sita, his consort, took charge of his sons.


V. 29. A. Vrsa or Indra is the thousand-eyed deity, and is contented with his due share in the sacrifices. He is the destroyer of his enemies (the Asuras), the cleaver of the wings of mountains, and maintains his superb rank, with his son, Jayanta, shining out.

In Hindu mythology, Jayanta, is the son of Indra, the king of the gods (devas) and his mother Shachi (Indrani). He resides in Svarga, the Hindu heaven, governed by Indra. He has a sister called Jayanti. He appears in various Hindu scriptures as fighting wars on behalf of the gods and his father. Jayanta also appears in the epic Ramayana and other lore, in which he disguises himself as a crow.

-- Jayanta, by Wikipedia


B. This thousand-eyed king (Kusa as well as Madanapala) liberal (to the poor), able to break his adversaries, contented with pursuing his duties day to day (or leying equal taxes), fondly attached to the path of virtue,— holds the position of Indra’s authority, with glittering victory and far-reaching policy.

V. 30. A. The fire, -- which (owes its strength to wood or) has its strength rising in proportion to the wood (supplied to it), whose flames, when (fed up) by butter rise up to a great splendour and which has its glow spreading on high — has no existence like the “sky-flower”, if not fed by straw.

B. This king (Kusa or Madana) has made his power felt (lit. travel) right up to the end of the quarters, his weapons proving (lit. mounting) their high efficacy in war, though he has no great liking for bloodshed, and any oppression by him (or thirst of the king for riches) is as impossible as the sky-flower.

V. 31. A. The veritable Dharmaraja (Yama), the lotus-feet of whom are made the ornaments of its head by his buffalo, who delights the sun-god (his father); he, as the Dispenser of justice3, [It may be noted here that in mediaeval iconography of Bengal, the god, Yama, is shown as holding evenly in his hand a balance (undoubtedly the balance of justice.] is called ‘Dharmaraja'; holding the balance even, he is called ‘Samavarti'; and wielder of the rod, he is known as ‘Dandadhara’.

B. That king (Kusa or Madanapala), the lotus-feet of whom are made their head ornaments by (other) kings, makes his allies rejoice; the wielder of the royal sceptre, he is impartial in his dealings with the world and is the veritable Dharmaraja, sternly exercising his judicial authority.

V. 32. A. May the demon (Nairrta) who is riding Kumuda, (his favourite elephant), desirous of leading other night-rovers, frightening (all) in the extreme by devouring dead bodies in great number,— be merry.

B. May that king (Knsa as well as Madanapala), who is of virtuous nature,— causing great rejoicings in the world (or, in the case of Kusa,-- producing great prosperity of Kumuda, the brother of Kumudvati)— desirous2 [Or "who likes sending out spies at night".] of guiding the misguided to the right path— inspiring awe manifestly by the movement of his exceedingly large forces,— be happy.  

V. 33. A. Pracetas (the god, Varuna) protects one who is devoted (and invokes his mercy) and abides by the ordinance (relating to Varuna-puja), who also protects the (western quarter) and the man who is helpless and begs for his mercy and in whose region the Brahma (lit. the poet-sovereign) was born.

Varuna is a Vedic deity associated initially with the sky, later also with the seas as well as Ṛta (justice) and Satya (truth). He is found in the oldest layer of Vedic literature of Hinduism, such as hymn 7.86 of the Rigveda. He is also mentioned in the Tamil grammar work Tolkāppiyam, as Kadalon the god of sea and rain. He is said to be the son of Kashyapa (one of the seven ancient sages).

In the Hindu Puranas, Varuna is the god of oceans, his vehicle is a Makara (crocodile) and his weapon is a Pasha (noose, rope loop). He is the guardian deity of the western direction. In some texts, he is the father of the Vedic sage Vasishtha.

-- Varuna, by Wikipedia


B. He (king Kusa as well as Madanapala) is the veritable Pracetas -- who possesses a large heart, and with Laksmi (Ma) remaining ever devoted to him, protects good men who are hopeless, and whose kingdom is the birth-place of the poet-laureates.

V. 34. A. The well-known Wind-god who blows among the rows of flower plants, is a great object of attraction to a species of deer. He is, again, one by whom the large Gajari trees (or the rogues of elephants) are rendered restless by breaking them down and rocking them to and fro.

B. He (Kusa as well as Madanapala) is known as very liberal, and he follows in the footsteps of the wise, and is the hero (or the chief actor) on the world-stage. By him the whole host of his enemies, who were great scoundrels, were made quite unsteady by defeats and unrests.

V. 35. A. (He is as Kubera)— (lit. a devotee of Siva), takes his residence in the white mountain (Kailasa) and possesses treasures, called nidhis, which are praised for their many excellences. He alone shines on the shoulder of (his favourite elephant) Sarvabhauma.

B. He (king Kusa as well as Madanapala) is praised as a mine of virtues, always wishes for whatever is good (or is devoted to Siva) and has effected the stability of his spotless family. He alone shines, seated on the head of the lords paramount.

V. 36. A. Isa (Isana = Mahadeva) amuses that great Goddess of the river, held on the matted hair and skull, who is known as Bhogavati (in the lower world), who is Suranadi or Mandakini, (in heaven), and who being watched (by all) pervades the entire mortal world (and is known as Bhagirathi).

B. He (king Kusa as well as Madanapala) keeps in high spirits that grand army (Mahavahini) which is maintained by cowries (as wages) and daily bread, in complete by itself and initiated in righteous warfare, and pervades the (entire) mortal world.

V. 37. A. That (Vasuki), the Lord of the nether world, is the leader of the great army of the stupendous-sized serpents, and is adhered to as one, who bears (on his head) the mother earth, and on whom Hari with Laksmi sleeps.

Vāsuki is a serpent king in Hindu and Buddhist religion. He is described as having a gem called Nagamani on his head. Manasa, another naga, is his sister. Vāsuki is Shiva's snake.

-- Vasuki, by Wikipedia


B. He, king (Kusa or Madanapala), who has a large number (of people) to protect, who is the commander of the vast army of elephants, and who appears like Vasuki, the Lord of Patala. (For) he (the king) bears the burden of Earth and Hari1 [(In the case of Madanapala) Hari (once a great friend of Bhima) resorts to him (Madanapaladeva) as his protector.] accompanied by Laksmi rests on him.

V 38. A. (Brahma) with his submissive row of swans (as his vehicle) is called “the Grand Old God”, “the world's grand sire”, and “the Preserver”. He is praised as the Artist, who in His omnipotence (lit. whose omnipotence) has drawn the pictures of various worlds in the universe (Brahmanda).

B. This (king, Kusa as well as Madanapala), before whom the crowd of pious kings bowed low, as he is the wisest man, the father of his subjects, the preserver of all stamping out pestilence and disease, and is lauded as one possessing the glory of working miracles amongst all peoples inhabiting the earth.

V. 39. A. While the Sun-god of the world is shining causing the day-lotuses to bloom and night lilies to fade, the horizon becomes starless, the moon disappears, and (thus) his ascendency is well-established (lit. well done).

B. He (king Kusa as well as Madanapala) being the friend of this world and causing Laksmi to bloom and enemies to fade, relief takes place, all sources of vice vanish and righteousness prevails.

V. 40 A. The moon who is attached to the bright half of the month and who has deer as a mark on his disc, does not make the day-lotuses bloom and decorates the sky (lit. the pathway of the gods) which is sacred.

B The king (Kusa as well as Madanapala) provides for the livelihood of men, attaches himself solely to the side of virtue, has his mind engrossed in Hari1 [(In the case of Madanapala) who has his heart possessed by (his present friend) Hari.] (God) and adorns the society of esteemed persons.

V. 41. A. In this way always he (Kusa as well as Madanapala,) shines, assuming the role of fulfilling the hopes of all, as one striving to get to the good old kings (as his ideal), and as one who represents the sum total of the religious merits (of his subjects).

Kusha or Kusa or Kush and his twin brother Lava were the children of Rama and Sita. Their story is recounted in the Hindu epic, Ramayana and its other versions. Hindu traditions claim he ruled the entire region of Kashmir, Indus River and Hindu Kush as frontier lands of India known as Hindu Kush Kshetra and founded the city of Kashmir in the valley and Kasur with Lavapuri of Lava(his twin brother) in base lands... His brother Lava is traditionally believed to have founded Lavapuri (present-day city of Lahore).

-- Kusha (Ramayana), by Wikipedia


B. In this way he (Kusa as well as Madanapala), shines always assuming the protectorship of the different quarters, as one who aspires to (the glorious rank) of the guardian deities of the quarters and represents the sum total of the glorious virtues of them all.

V. 42. A. Or he (Kusa) being the son of Rama, the incarnation of Purnsottama (Visnu) is himself also Purnsottama incarnate. — For (as the sruti says)-— ‘the (father's) self is reborn as the son'.

B. He (Madanapala) being the son of Ramapala, in whom appeared the best in man, is himself also the best of men. For (as the Sruti says) 'the (father's) self is reborn as the son'.

V. 43. A. For, that one god, Visnu, has always on his hand the Nandaka (sword), carries — the excellent Pancajanya (conch) and is always with his beneficent Sudarsana (disc); and he bears the Kaumodaki (mace).

B. He is the one great king whose taxes are pleasing to all good men, who carries on war of annihilation on his enemies (or carries on war against those who support his enemies), who is of beneficent nature and good-looking, and proceeds with his salutary work on earth to the universal joy.

V. 44. A. Ever triumphant is the Almighty (Visnu), mounted on Garuda (lit. the son of Vinata), the succourer with four arms wielding such weapons.

B. Ever victorious is the mighty lord (Kusa as well as Madanapala), clever and tactful without a fault, gladdening the submissive people, who stands pre-eminent as the Defender (of the nation) maintaining fully armed warriors.

V. 45. A. This (Purusottama), the delighter of the gods, wears an apparel which is of the golden hue and beautiful, and clasps Lakshmi to his bosom out of exuberance of love.

B. This lord (Kusa as well as Madanapala) in his pre-eminence envelops the sky with silver white fame; and fond of the learned, he clasps me (his poet) in his bosom (or shuts up Laksmi in his heart).  

V. 46. A. He with the epithets — "Lotus-eyed" "Lord of the all-pervading army”, "Indra’s uterine (younger) brother", “Imperishable" and “Almightly” — is served whole-heartedly by both Laksmi and Sarasvati.

B. This lotus-eyed king (Kusa as well as Madanapala), who may be likened with Visnu, the younger brother of Indra, with his army moving everywhere, who is full of glory and without a flaw, is resorted to by Laksmi and Sarasvati alike.  

V 47. A. By the fearless one (Purusottama),1 [This is the name of a hill near Mathura. In order to save the Gopas from rain and storm Krsna is said to have lifted up the hill and to support it on his finger for seven days.] mount Govardhana was lifted up; after getting the Kaliya serpent under his control, he would not let (king) Kamsa live.

B. By him (king Kusa as well as Madanapala) armed with bow, the king, who multiplied sins, was uprooted, (or— in the case of Madanapala, king named Govardhana2 [Is Govardhana to be identified with the king of that name referred to in verse 7 of the Belava Inscriptions of Bhojavarman (E. I. Vol XII. p 40)? But he was a contemporary of Jatavarman, brother-in-law of Vigrahapala III, grandfather of Madanapala.] was destroyed or dethroned). Whom even though he is found on the expanded hood of a snake, shall he (the king) not save? (or in the case of Madanapala, he would not let the ‘Naga’ king of Kalinga live if he once get him (the Kalinga king) in his clutches— or would he not save Kalinga king, after getting him as his ally?).

V. 48. A. May this king (Kusa), the protector of his people, — who with his joyous exalted career is held in high esteem by the good and who being a liberal donor has his hands always wet while making gifts — rule long his kingdom with his great fame spread far and wide.

B. May this king (Madanapala) — who is adored as pious and as the deadly enemy of men of impious character — and who being a liberal donor has his hands always wet with water and carrying forest Kusa grass in the act of making pious gifts — rule long his state with his very great fame spread everywhere.

Here ends the fourth canto entitled ‘‘the later career of Rama.”

_______________

Notes:

1. MS repeats [x]

1. MS has [x] after [x]. The metre becomes defective if we retain the [x].

2. MS [x]

3. HS [x] with restoration of an [x] which seems unnecessary.

4. [x] -- R.G.B.

5. HS corrects [x] into [x]

6. MS [x]

7. [x] (Crown-princeship) -- R.G.B.

1. This letter is half cut away in the MS.

2. These two letters also are half cut away. HS restores [x], but there seems to be no space for a visarga which may be dropped according to the Vartika "[x]" on Panini VIII. 3.36.

1. MS [x] which makes the compound difficult to explain.

2. The scribe erroneously inserts here the letters [x] of the words in v. 6.

3. That Vaidyadeva, the minister of Kumarapala, son of Ramapala, was appointed king of Kamarupa by the Bengal king is known from the Kamauli copper-plates of Vaidyadeva (vide Gaudarajamata p. 127ff.)

1. MS [x] -- the letter [x] after [x] appearing to be superfluous.

2. Epigraphic records hitherto discovered are yet silent about probability of any prince of the name of Rajyapala being a son of Ramapala. If he were a son to that king, he must have predeceased his father. Or, was he a nephew of Ramapala, being a son of either of the latter's two brothers? Did he show disaffection to the king, because Kumarapala was annointed as the Crown-prince? If so, he probably became reconciled afterwards and having acted like a dutiful son to the king was offered royal protection.

1. MS [x]

2. MS has [x] after [x] which may be placed after [x] in the second pada -- but yet the metre remains a little defective.

3. MS [x]

1. MS [x]

2. HS [x]

1. MS [x]

2. [x] R.G.B. Cf. Ramayana, Uttarkanda, Chapter 122, vv. 3-4.

3. The Sekhasubodaya has the following lines in a verse about the death of Ramapala in the Ganges: -- ([x])

1. MS [x]

2. MS [x]

3. HS [x] which appears to be untenable.

4. MS [x]. We have restored [x], which is required both for metre and sense.

1. It appears that king Gopala met with a premature death while encountering either an elephant or a crocodile.

1. MS has [x] -- which makes the metre faulty.

1. The other qualifying clauses are the same as in A.

2. The letters [x] are now totally lost, although they are in HS. The whole verse has been restored in a smaller hand at the bottom of the leaf.

3. MS has [x] before this word and it should be omitted as in HS.

4. MS [x]

5. The portion [x] to [x] was erroneously put before verse 16, but corrected and re-written in its proper place.

6. The [x] is not distinct.

7. MS [x]

8. MS [x]

1. [x] -- R.G.B.

2. [x] -- R.G.B.

1. The moon being the Lord of the plant world is said here to be the "only hope" for the flower plants.

2. This Candra has been identified with the son of Suvarnadeva, and grandson of Mahana, ruler of Anga. (Vide R.G.B.'s article 'Madanapala's Coronation and Identification of Candra' in I.H.Q. vol. v p. 35 ff.)

1. HS [x]

1. MS [x]

2. MS [x]

1. MS [x]

2. [x] -- R.G.B.

1. MS [x]

2. MS [x], HS [x]

3. The poet means to suggest that the different names of Madana i.e. Mara, Kama, Sambarari and Ananga do not apply to king Kusa and Madanapala.

1. MS [x]

2. MS [x]

3. MS [x]. For both metre and sense we have changed it into [x].

4. HS has restored [x] in place of which we suggest [x] which would give much better sense. For, without a reference to his wine-cup the picture of Baladeva would be incomplete.

5. Revati was the wife of Baladava who shared in the drinking revelry of her husband. (Cf. Meghaduta -- verse 49 -- ([x]).

1. Balarama is noted for his many astonishing feats of strength, one of which is his dragging away the waves of the Yamuna under the influence of liquor by plunging his plough-share into the water, until the river assumed a human form and asked his pardon.

2. Kusa is also noted for his fiery spirit and bravery in battle-field. What Kalindi exactly means in his case is not, however, clear.

3. [x]. Rama recognised Kala first (lit. by him the unveiling of Kala's self-concealment was rightly made). Then Kala announced before Rama the wish of Brahma that he should now leave this world as the time stipulated for his existence was up. -- R.G.B.

4. MS [x].

1. i.e. time extending over ten thousand and ten hundred years.

2. Bama, one of the epithets of Laksmi.

1. MS [x]

2. HS [x]

3. [x] -- R.G.B.

4. [x] -- R.G.B.

1. MS [x]

2. MS [x]

3. This word is not found in any of the Sanskrit lexicons known to us. It occurs with the two meanings given above only in the Sanskrit Dictionary of Monier-Williams.

1. MS [x]

2. [x] -- N.G.B.

3. It may be noted here that in mediaeval iconography of Bengal, the god, Yama, is shown as holding evenly in his hand a balance (undoubtedly the balance of justice).

1. [x] is doubtful in MS.

2. Or "who likes sending out spies at night".

1. MS [x]

2. MS [x]

3. This refers to [x] (water-ordeal) as described in Yajnavalkya Smrti and Mitaksara: -- [x]. Yajnavalkya II. 110.

1. MS has a superfluous [x] before [x].

2. MS [x]

3. MS [x] which makes the metre defective.

4. MS [x]

1. MS [x]

2. [x]

1. MS [x]

2. [x]: R.G.B.

1. (In the case of Madanapala) Hari (once a great friend of Bhima) resorts to him (Madanapaladeva) as his protector.

2. MS [x]

1. MS [x]

2. MS [x]. Hs's reading makes the metre defective.

1. (In the case of Madanapala) who has his heart possessed by (his present friend) Hari.

2. MS [x]

3. The restoration of one letter [x] here improves both metre and sense.

4. To obviate all difficulties here we propose to make it dental [x] ([x]). Then the construction will be: (1) ([x]) [x] -- This king of us shines among all the great kings as the sum total of (the subjects') merits -- (2) [x] -- This our king shines representing all the glorious achievements of the Dikpalas put together.

5. MS [x].

1. HS [x]

1. HS [x]

1. MS [x]

2. Here the two goddesses Rama and Uma may also be suggested.

1. HS [x]

2. MS [x]

3. MS [x]

4. HS [x]

5. MS [x]

6. MS [x]

1. This is the name of a hill near Mathura. In order to save the Gopis from rain and storm Krsna is said to have lifted up the hill and to support it on his finger for seven days.

2. Is Govardhana to be identified with the king of that name referred to in verse 7 of the Belava Inscriptions of Bhojavarman (E.I. Vol. XII, p. 40)? But he was a contemporary of Jatavarman, brother-in-law of Vigrahapala III, grandfather of Madanapala.

3. MS [x]; HS's restoration of visarga after [x] and correction of [x] into [x] make the verse metrically defective.

4. MS [x]

1. [x] -- R.G.B.
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 33177
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: The Ramacaritam of Sandhyakaranandin

Postby admin » Tue May 18, 2021 9:28 am

Canto V: [Conclusion]

V. 1. (The village) Brhadvatu, that land of holiness or bliss, — which was the crest-jewel of the mandala of Varendri, the head of the earth and which was situated close to the city of Pundravardhana, was the (poet’s) native place.

V. 2. In that (place) was born Pinakanandin— an abode of a multitude of virtues, like Nandin (Siva's attendant) — in the well-known and illustrious family of the eminent Nandins.  

V. 3. Unto him was born a son (named) Prajapati, a person of invaluable merits, who was foremost amongst the Karanas (Kayasthas), with whom politics was a favourite subject, and whose name was honoured by the official title or rank of a Sandhi (i.e. a Sandhivigrahika, a minister of Peace and War).

V. 4. His son was Sandhyakarnandin, the full-moon (as it were) to the forest of lilies in the shape of the Nandi-family, a person who used to attack or criticise the slanderers (or the mischievous people) and to delight the good.

V. 5. He was a poet -- proficient in all languages, a perfection amongst those who knew literature, the chief of (all) savants, the veritable Meru (mountain) of jewels of accomplishments (or merits), and the residential quarters (as it were) for the art of poetic composition.

V. 6-8. He, a veritable Virinci (Brahma) in the art of composition (or literary creation) and the foremost amongst those versed in the science of faultless words, narrated this brilliant and very wonderful history of Rama (Rama and Ramapala)
, the new incarnation of Narayana (Visnu), the ruler of all the worlds, who adorned that age which followed the krta (or satya) yuga, and who was (to his enemies) a Yama (Dharmarat) on the field of battle [or, who (Rama) could be likened to Yudhisthira (living) on the eve of Kali-yuga, or who (Ramapala) could be compared with the Buddha (living) on the border of Kali-yuga] — by means of verses, a few in number, which could please all men, in which (the figure slesa) offered no trouble (to readers), the interest in which remained abiding on account of the events (described), and which possessed the pith of profound and lofty words (or sentences).

V. 9. May this famous record of Rama, a string of jewels in the great ocean of nectar-like suktis (good sayings) composed by the poet, Sandhyakaranandin, last as long as the earth, water, fire, air and ether (or sky) exist.  

V. 10. May the poetry (of Sandhyabaranandin)— which has the neck of the king as its only right place— charming by its inherent beauty as well as by the two ornaments of speech, rupaka and jati or svabhavakti (which respectively consist of delineation by metaphor and delineation of things as they are) — which presents happy thoughts— and which is (splendid) by its artistic disposition (never-fading) in arousing elegant sentiments— be laid to heart.  


I salute that (Mahesvara), the god having the digit of the moon as his decoration, to whose dark neck Beauty resorts, who carries the (Sesa) serpent in his arm, and who wears a garland of skulls hanging from his matted hairs...

(Vasudeva) by whom the cruel army of the demons was benefited by his immediately striking them with his mace!...

The power competent to offer proper protection to the world, arose in him (Rama), who attained great strength after having acquired the knowledge of weapons and the lores (Bala-vidya and Atibala-vidya) from Visvamitra whom he pleased, and who rent asunder the demoness Tadaka by his arrows....

Rama, whose joy was enhanced by (observing) the excellent hermitage of Visvamitra (Kusika’s son), caused the destruction of (Marica), the son of Tadaka, and cut down the body of Subahu (the demon)....

He (Rama) destroyed, by means of his military art, the (chance of) residence in heaven of (Parasurama), the enemy of the thousand-armed king (Karttaviryya), who took possession of the whole earth again and again (i.e. twenty-one times) by killing the Ksattriya rulers....

(Rama) having taken up residence, along with his other brother (Laksmana), in the terrible huge forest where housing was a difficult task, and also having in his company his wife, whose breasts were to be rent by the misconduct of the crow, as damned fate would have it...

Rama) having humiliated (Surpanakha), the sister of that Raksasa (lit. the eater of flesh, i.e. Ravana), (the woman) who had a large number of kinsmen, with her nose and mouth deformed, on account of her having her face (disfigured) with nose severed from it and having brought about the death of Khara and caused the destruction of Dusana and Trisiras...

(Rama) having torn asunder the array of troops (of Ravana) in Janasthana forest, having appointed his brother (Laksmana) for guarding Sita (lit. the daughter of the Earth), and having (himself) been dragged away by the greed of catching the illusory deer (i.e. Marica), fleet like the flash of lighting...

In course of the search Sita (was found out) and waited upon by that (Hanumat) possessing the lustre of the sun, while she was in the clutches of the fierce demons and remained terrified, with nothing except mere breath of life left to her, and feeling wretched on account of her bewilderment by the multitude of objects of the senses (heaped round her)....

She (Sita) having been consoled by means of message, that enemy’s (Ravana’s) park along with the arrays of its guards was shattered, and his city, named Lanka, was also burnt down (by that Hanumat)....

The monkey heroes, — quite competent to pull up mountains, with their vigour doubly increased by the encouragement from (Hanumat), the son of Wind, and with great merriment, having been joined by the forces of Nila and Angada, lending their support to Kumuda, having enormous strength (or moving with great speed), accompanied by Nala, Prthu and Rambha, meeting Rabhasa, united with the armies of Tara, Puskara, Gaja and others, raising together a tumultuous uproar, clapping (their hands), shaking their hard palms and tails, with their thunderbolt-like claws which they used as weapons, and (being led) by the brilliant Jambavat (the chief of the bears), — resorted to Rama....

(A bridge), which was undertaken (to be built) by those great warriors (Hanumat and others), by whom huge and distant hills were hurled up root and branch, by means of their large arms appearing like shoots of thunderbolt (or hatchet), whose (ever) youthful forearms felt quite chafed (or irritated) in pulling up the hard hills, who (thus) removed obstruction to the view of the nether world (lit. the world of the Nagas), who well devised (the plan of) the destruction of the demons and who put forth excessive efforts (to that end)....

(A bridge), which caused to the fish a great disturbance in their own regions by the hills (thrown into the sea), on account of which the large aquatic animals were moving at (great) speed, which was crowded by the distracted flocks of (aquatic) birds and which was striking constantly against the skate-fish...

(A bridge), which came in terrible collision with the hosts of alligators and sharks moving with their fearfully gaping mouths, by which the earth was delighted, and by which the great bulk of high waves of the ocean was passed over and checked....

(A bridge), in (the construction of) which the strength of the monkey troops, who surpassed the speed of the wind, was known (or recognised), on account of which the flocks of Ati-birds were dislodged from their resorts, by which the water-elephants with flowing ichor were crushed, and by which the waters (of the sea) with many (aquatic) birds were broken through....

(A bridge), which, by reason of its hasty construction with rocks, made the aquatic animals (so many) lifeless corpses, by means of which the chief enemy (Ravana) was reached, and from which the energetic whales of incomparably huge bodies met with a check to their strength....

(A bridge), a much trodden one, by which conches and clouds were dispersed on account of their striking against the rocks, which moved up by the stirring of hills, and which caused the waters (of the ocean), having tremendous formations, to dance....

That terrible ocean was bound over by Rama, who had a reliable follower in (Vibhisana), the second (uterine) brother of (Ravana), the lord of the demons (lit. flesh-eaters), having constructed a bridge of rocks (over it)...

(The mountain), the uneven or formidable ridges of which were ground (to dust) by the stamping of the redoubtable armies of Rama, and the elephants of which (therefore) took recourse to the speed of their legs for retreat as the (only means) to safety...

That (mountain), which was left by lions, from which buffaloes fled away, the foot-hills of which were shaken and summits struck down and which had the whole expanse of its forests divested of beauty and made perishable on account of the fury of the attack....

All at once, (that mountain) became devoid of its association with birds and antelopes, where the serpents were killed, and in which the dens of ferocious animals were destroyed, the rhinoceroses etc. dispersed and bears lost their (own) places....

(That mountain), of which a changed condition was brought about with regard to its circles of huge boulders which were thrown down, numerous waterfalls and rows of bowers, and which contained an increasing uproar (of the monkey force) in its reverberated lines of caves, and which became greatly agitated in (all) its caves or hollows....

People also saw that (mountain) having its neighbouring gardens without their leaves, sprouts, trunks etc., coloured with various metallic ores and with all its mines destroyed....

That (mountain) was soon bereft of beauty, because such of its parts as peaks and table-lands, of gold, silver and jewels, were injured by the followers of the chief of monkeys who mercilessly trod upon (them)....

Thus in that (mountain), they (the monkeys?), now the paramours of the damsels of gods, vidyadharas and gandharvas, felt (rather) disconsolate, though their dalliance was sustained (?) by rise of passion inflamed by (their taking of) Kalpa wine....

Then a dreadful army, with its strength not to be measured by the great flesh-eating demons, was raised by him (Rama), who had the monkey-chief (Sugriva) as his ally and who had thoroughly laid a seize to the enemy's territory....

Rama’s army, which desired to be augmented by the monkey troops, setting at naught the (inaccessible; mountainous tracts with great enthusiasm, by which (army) chains of mountains were uprooted, hurled off and made to collide with one another....

(Rama’s army)— very brilliant, in the neighbourhood of which Raksasas were moving about in great excitement, by which even the mountains were spilt up by means of large shafts, by which the whole host of the ten-headed monster's offsprings were dispersed, and in whose (heart) very high hopes were raised....

(Rama’s army) — which was quite impervious, with its array of foot-soldiers, treated with filial affection and which repeatedly threw off obstruction to each other, acting like Destiny itself, intent on destroying lives....

(Rama's army) which caused rivers of blood to flow on, which was strewn over with the heads and trunks of the vanquished forces, and by which great archers were hurled into the jaws of Death (lit. the buffalo-riding god)....

There, in the midst of the demons, the enemies of the universe, shone Laksmana, the brother of the blessed one (Rama), by whom the most valiant Kumbhakarna was shorn of his greatness, on his body being cut to pieces....

Whereupon the enemy, who was the conqueror of Indra and who assumed illusory appearances, was led to the abode of Death (i.e. killed) by that valorous Laksmana, who was cured of the swoon by the son of the Wind-god (Hanumat), who had uprooted and carried away the large mountain (Gandhamadana), having walked (thither) with very great speed, and provided for the life-restoring (lit. supreme) drug (growing therein)....

Some calamity, which was well understood by Rama and which was only (faintly) guessed by the ten-headed monster, grew thick. For, the latter had to see with his own eyes the disaster of the severing of his own heads (as they were cut off one by one)....

Then by him (Rama) was caused the death of the king of Lanka — who, clotted with the thick mass of blood streaming out from the line of the hollows of his severed necks, was an object of a great merriment to the flock of birds (or the multitude of gods) sporting in the sky — whose relations had already been slain — and who, having his strength in his Chandrahasa sword, was putting up a terrible fight....

(Sita) who got stupefied even in the matter of her ordinary practices or in her (present) condition— round whom gathered the (storm of) passion of one (i.e. Ravana) whose (only) pleasure consisted in the oppression of the world -- who was (thus) doing great good to the world -- and whose great glory was proclaimed loudly by the (beatings of) drums....

(Sita), who was born in the home of the Vedic lore (Brahman) (or born out of the sacrificial ground), who fell unconscious as the effect of the scorching poison of (humiliation attended with scandal) and became thin and emaciated and who, on account of her very fearful habitation (in the midst of the demons), wearing away flesh, which admitted of no sleep, felt her body, (once) so crimson-coloured, like a great burden....

(Sita) who, moreover, became very thin and emaciated through fear of the huge hordes of the Kaccha country (of the south), and was able to raise herself only with the help of her female companion (Sarama) -- (or on whom blackness was visibly growing up) -- and who was found in the Asoka grove, surrounded by the senseless Raksasas, (lit. eaters of raw flesh)....

(Rama) with whom her union (in spirit) was established— by the “accessory” sentiments surging within her, associated with which were sloth, sickness of heart, fatigue, despondency and sadness, and which started with (apparent) insanity, insensibility, reflection, anxiety and self-disparagement, as well as by the external manifestations, in which was (evident) the great thrill of joy (all over the body) and among which were the actions of mind, intellect, body and speech — all of them expressing great distress....

(Sita) bearing in her mind her beloved Lord Rama, who was adored by gods and who was sustaining his life which was fixed upon the place of his beloved (Sita) and which was (considered) an evil, it being joyless and quite pitiable....

(Sita) who was the only instrument for the fulfilment of the task of the host of gods which was unequalled on earth in the point of its fruitfulness, and who destined not to remain (ever) in the country of the meanest enemies, (therefore) attained fruitfulness though she was in this world with her face wet with tears....

(Sita) who was wearing garlands of large Malati, fine Nagakesara and excellent Vakula flowers, by whom was caused to all in this world the greatest of rejoicings, and who caused the destruction of the enemies (Raksasas) who were given to much drinking....

(Sita) whose beauty resembling that of golden ketaka was terror-stricken— who was intensely adored all over the world — and whose breath was as cool and fragrant as the water abounding in lotuses, red and blue....

(Sita) who, (roughly) handled as she was, by the wicked (Raksasas), was led out of compassion by the tender support of the hands of her Lord, and who, therefore, felt greatly honoured — and whose sorrow due to the enemy’s fire of passion was removed at once...

Also on account of the youthful heavenly courtezans who had great passion of love (surging in their breast), and who were dancing passionately while they were wearing their (suitable) apparels and while their jewelled anklet-bells were tinkling sweetly on....

He (Rama) with his elation checked, treated with kindness his wife, who would be the mother of (heroic) sons (who would be) ornaments to the world; and having entered into war stamped out the demons and gave protection to the entire world...

(Sita) with her mind, fixed on (Ramacandra) as the protector from fear, whose lamentation filled with acute grief the entire world, and who possessed a figure which excelled that of the Cupid....

While the crowd of people in great sorrow was weeping, Rama, the Paramatman Himself, returned to his own abode (i.e. attained heaven), having plunged into the holy river (Sarayu) -- alas! that was a sight quite unbearable -- along with all his dependants....

His younger brother, Satrughna, the ruler of earth, also died of the great affliction and went to heaven. This (death) of the slayer of the son of Kumbhinasi (i.e. Lavanasura) occurred as the result of the compact (made)....

That mind-born deity, who was the father of Aniruddha, had weapons of odd number, was the lover of Rati, and made the rustic (or the vulgar) people quite restless, united himself with the supreme season of flowers...

Who was not shaken off from his inborn fortitude by him (Cupid), who humbled the pride of the young damsels? He, who with manifest strength (or having displayed his valour) is without mercy towards his enemies, has beaten on (hitherto) unbeaten and un-injured...

Balarama, impetuous in his strength, snatched away wine from the mouth of his dear one (Revati); and on account of the insolence of his enemies, his weapon, (the formidable) plough-share was led through the river Yamuna, overcoming its hostile waves; and a human from in distress (which was assumed by the river Yamuna) was dragged (near himself)....

The veritable Dharmaraja (Yama), the lotus-feet of whom are made the ornaments of its head by his buffalo, who delights the sun-god (his father); he, as the Dispenser of justice, is called ‘Dharmaraja'; holding the balance even, he is called ‘Samavarti'; and wielder of the rod, he is known as ‘Dandadhara’....

May the demon (Nairrta) who is riding Kumuda, (his favourite elephant), desirous of leading other night-rovers, frightening (all) in the extreme by devouring dead bodies in great number,— be merry.

-- -- The Ramacaritam of Sandhyakaranandin, by Dr. R. C. Majumdar, M.A., Ph.D., Dr. Radhagovinda Basak, M.A., Ph.D., Pandit Nanigopal Banerji


The meaning suggested is this: —

May Gauri, the (bride of Siva)— ever clinging to the neck of her Lord as the only right place -- who is possessed of pre-eminent virtues and beauties of her form, excelling by nature as well as by (artificial) decorations — be kindly disposed (to all).

V. 11. This (record) of the noble achievements of the two Ramadevas, viz the lord of the Raghus and the king of Gauda, is a Ramayana of the Kali age, and here (on earth) the poet (Sandhyakaranandin) too is (to be regarded as the Valmiki of the Kali age.

V. 12. That there is a perverse criticism of the work, because of its unprecedented character, from one who is mean and malicious -- itself testifies to its absolute purity. What can we do in this matter?

Another meaning which is suggested on the basis of Slesa is this:—

The word "khalikara" is derived from that word "khala" (by the grammatical change in form) in the sense of making up what it was not before by nature. (Thus the word implies making something "khala" or of inferior character, which it was not before by nature). Therefore this (grammatical form itself) is the obvious proof of its superior character. We have nothing to do in this matter.

V. 13. Let there remain a traducer in whoso constant criticism there is an advertisement of literary works by a worthy one— this being done, its transmission among the populace is seen to yield beneficial results— just as a threshing floor is desired to be there for those who are busily engaged in their work (of cultivation) — in treading round which (viz. the threshing floor) the movement by the bullock not tied by a rope is found to be of good result, the corn being threshed and heaped up.

Image


V. 14. The person who desires to shade (lit. make low) the moon shining so high by placing his hands up is a veritable blind man, for (by that action) he darkens his own self.

N.B. The second interpretation may be put thus: — One, who desires to depreciate the glory of a great artist (or poet) with a mind to point out his defects only, lowers himself.

V. 15. On apprehending the dull and senseless people as bottomless sin itself in hiding, in this and that place, this poem (Ramacaritam) as a stream of Rasa, formed compactly of many inherent beauties, was kept carefully concealed (i.e. unpublished),— just as on the apprehension that a pool of water is nothing but quagmire, deep unfathomably and covered (completely under water) in this and that place, the mild cow streaming with sweet milk is kept carefully tied up with a mass of ropes.

V. 16. Speech— the fair one— passing from lip to lip (lit. through tongue) came out, with the picturesquely formed lines having symmetrical arrangement of words. Good men in their hundreds are here voluntarily to rescue her (from vile attacks);—(the meaning suggested--) even as the cow, with the rope with which she was tied down, came out step by step with the beautiful chain on her legs; and good men in their hundreds are here voluntarily to rescue her from the quagmire.  

V. 17. Praise only the worthy ones who defend from heartless (attackers) this sacred poem. (Those) wise men shed nectar even from (what is more) sound through (a process of) refinement using only their tongue as the (necessary) appliance (for it).  


We are presenting this translation not because we consider it a proper biography in the modern sense, but because there is nothing better to offer on the life and achievements of Sri Sankara. Sri Sankaracharya is undoubtedly the most widely known of India’s saintly philosophers, both within the country and outside, and there is a constant enquiry for an account of his life….

Image


Ever since [the Madhava-Vidyaranya] was first printed in Ganapat Krishnaji Press in Bombay in the year 1863, it has continued to be a popular work on Sankara and it is still the only work on the basis of which ordinary people have managed to get some idea of the great Acharya, in spite of the severe uncharitable criticism1 [The motives behind the criticism of Madhviya-sankara-vijaya and the scurrilous nature of the criticism will be evident from the following extract from page 158 of The Age of Sankara by T. S. Narayana Sastri (1916): “We know from very reliable sources that this Madhaviya-Sankara-vijaya was compiled by a well-known Sanskrit scholar who passed away from this world just about eight years ago, under the pseudonym of ‘Madhava’— a 'synonym' for ‘Narayana’—specially to extol the greatness of the Sringeri Math, whose authority had been seriously questioned by the Kumbhakonam Math, the Acharyas of the latter Math claiming exclusive privilege of being entitled to the title of the 'Jagadgurus' for the whole of India as being the direct successors of Sri Sankara Bhagavatpada's own Math established by him at Kanchi, the greatness of which had been unnecessarily extolled by Rajachudamani Dikshita, Vallisahaya Kavi and Venkatarama Sarman in their respective works, Sankarabhyudaya, Achraya-dig-vijaya and Sankara-bhagavatpadacharitra. About fifty years ago, in the very city of Madras, as many may still remember, a fierce controversy raged between the adherents of the Kumbhakonam Math on the one hand, and those of the Sringeri Math headed by Bangalore Siddhanti Subrahmanya Sastri and two brothers —Kumbhakonam Srinivasa Sastri and Kumbhakonam Narayana Sastri—sons of Ramaswami Sastri, a protege of the Sringeri Math, on the other. We have very strong reasons to believe that this Sankara-dig-vijaya ascribed to Madhava, the Sankara-vijaya-vilasa ascribed to Chidvilasa, and the Sankara-vijaya-sara ascribed to Sadananda, had all been brought into existence by one or other of these three scholars, about this period, in answer to the Sankara-vijayas ascribed to Rajachudamani Dikshita and Vallisahaya Kavi.” Not satisfied with the above indictment, Sri T. S. Narayana Sastri gives the following bazaar gossip as proof of his contention on page 247 of his book, “The reader is also referred to an article in Telugu with the caption Sankara-vijaya-karthavevaru by Veturi Prabhakara Sastri of Oriental Manuscripts Library, Madras, published in the Literary Supplement of the Andhra Patrika of Durmathi Margasira (1921-22) where an interesting note about the author of the above mentioned ‘Sankara Vijaya’ (Sanakara-dig-vijaya of Madhava) is given. Here is an English rendering of a portion of that article: ‘I happened to meet at Bapatla, Brahmasri Vemuri Narasimha Sastri, during my recent tour in the Guntur District, in quest of manuscripts. I mentioned casually to him my doubts regarding the authorship of Madhaviya-sankara-vijaya. He revealed to me some startling facts. When he was at Madras some fifteen years ago, he had the acquaintance of the late Bhattasri Narayana Sastri who wrote the Sankara Vijaya published in the name of Madhava i.e., Vidyaranya, and that four others helped him in this production. The importance of the Sringeri Mutt is very much in evidence in this Sankara Vijaya (not correct). Taking a copy of the Vyasachala Grantha, available at Sringeri Mutt, Bhattasri Narayana Sastri made alterations here and there and produced the Sankara-vijaya in question. That he was an expert in such concoctions, is widely known among learned men.” The reader can easily grasp from this the scurrilous nature of the criticism, and the motives of the critics of this great work...]….

The criticism of it is uncharitable because it is mainly born of prejudice, and it has extended beyond finding fault with the text, to the question of its authorship itself. The critics somehow want to disprove that this work is, as traditionally accepted, a writing of the great Madhava-Vidyaranya, the author of the Panchadasi, and a great name in the field of Indian philosophical and theological literature. For, if his authorship is accepted, the book will receive a high status, which some schools of thought do not like for reasons of their own. In fact, except in the eyes of a few such biased scholars, it has actually got that status at present, especially in the eyes of the followers of Sankaracharya in general; but this position is sought to be undermined by disputing its authorship on all kinds of flimsy and far-fetched grounds. Besides the support of tradition, the colophon at the end of every chapter of the book mentions its author’s name as Madhava, that being the pre-monastic name of Vidyaranya….

Besides, the text is a masterpiece of literature and philosophy, which none but a great mind could have produced. But there are detractors of this great text who try to minimise its obvious literary worth by imputing plagiarism and literary piracy to its author. They claim that they have been able to show several verses that have entered into it from certain other Sankara-vijayas like Prachina-Sankara-vijaya and Vyasachala’s Sankara-vijaya. Though Prachina-Sankara-vijaya is nowhere available, T. S. Narayana Sastri claims to have in his possession some mutilated sections of it; but such unverifiable and exclusive claims on behalf of mutilated texts cannot be entertained by a critical and impartial student of these texts, since considerations other than the scholarly have entered into these criticisms, and manuscripts, too, have been heavily tampered with by Sanskrit Pandits. It can as well be that the other Vijayas have taken these from the work of Madhava….

Besides, it is forgotten by these critics that it is a literary technique of Vidyaranya, as seen from his other works also, to quote extensively from recognised authorities without specially mentioning their names, and that this feature of the present work goes only to establish the identity of its authorship with Vidyaranya…

Most of Vidyaranya’s other works are on high philosophical and theological themes, and if he has used methods and styles in such works differing from that of a historical poem like Sankara-dig-vijaya, it is only what one should expect of a great thinker and writer. That the author of this work has poetic effect very much in view can be inferred from his description of himself as Nava-Kalidasa (a modern Kalidasa) and his work as Navakalidasa-santana (offspring of the modern Kalidasa)….

Chronology and historicity did not receive much attention from even the greatest of Indian writers in those days.


-- Sankara-Dig-vijaya: The Traditional Life of Sri Sankaracharya, by Madhava-Vidyaranya, Translated by Swami Tapasyananda


V. 18. Salutation be to thee, O lord of Earth, who have worn on the crest (or on the ear) that gem, namely that poem, which is (highly) spoken of as pure perspicuous and pleasing to all, which abounds in arts and equivocal speeches, and which is a marvellous creation having its own inherent excellences of words as well as rhetorical embellishments.

Another meaning suggested is this:—

Adoration be to thee, O God, (Siva) the Lord of mountain and of eternal presence, possessing the Bull as conveyance and using as his head-ornament that lofty gem which consists of a lunar digit, having a pure and resplendent curve, which, by beautifying the ethereal space, appears wonderful.

V. 19. How can I sufficiently eulogise that (king), who is the abode of Hari (or, who is, as it were, Hariketana i.e. Arjuna himself), who may be likened to Hari (Visnu) that great sportive god-- (this person) who is a king possessing the shoulders of an elephant and who is aware of the quintessence of the earth?

N.B. The god Visnu also is aware of the strength of the earth having caused it to be borne on the shoulders of the (Sesa) serpent, and whose performance resembled that of the lion, when he assumed the Man-lion form.

V. 20. The learned are under the sway of that indescribable light, which belongs to the goddess of speech and learning; and verily to those meditating on it, what indeed is the knowledge of ‘non-duality' in their mind for the deliverance of their soul; and to one making a humble obeisance to it, why indeed should there be birth, which recurs on account of (the fulfilment) of a desire?

_______________

Notes:

1. MS [x]

2. MS [x]

3. MS [x]

4. If we read [x], it may be an adjective to [x]. In that case [x] may also be treated as an adjective to the same word to mean a place where lived great scholars (or Brahmacarins).

1. MS [x]

2. HS [x]

3. MS [x], which reading mars both the metre and the meaning.

4. MS [x]

5. HS [x]

1. HS [x]

2. MS [x]

3. MS [x]

4. MS [x]

1. MS [x]; HS [x]. We make it [x] -- [x] is the one essential thing of poetry the excellences of which are described in this verse. The description of poetry would, therefore, be incomplete without any reference to "Rasa".

2. [x]

1. MS [x]

2. MS [x]

1. MS [x]

2. MS repeats [x] after [x]

1. HS [x]

2. MS [x]

1. The [x] is better placed after [x]. It is put before the verb in the MS.

2. MS [x] would be meaningless here.

1. In fact, the first letter of the verse is very doubtful. It looks like [x]. HS [x].

2. HS [x]

3. MS [x]

4. MS [x]

5. [x]

6. The verse praises those champions of the poet who defend every word of his against his detractors. It means that those wise men prove every sound which they utter as having beautiful meaning and thereby please all, as if by sprinklings of nectar.

7. MS [x]

8. MS [x]

1. HS' reading, arrangement of words and restoration of letters of this verse can not be understood.

2. HS [x]

3. HS [x]

4. [x]

5. HS omits this statement of the scribe. Here the number of verses is put down as 220. We have, however, altogether 215 verses in the MS.
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 33177
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am

Re: The Ramacaritam of Sandhyakaranandin

Postby admin » Fri May 21, 2021 5:54 am

[The Stripped-Down Ramayana Verses Only]

Canto I:

I salute that (Mahesvara), the god having the digit of the moon as his decoration, to whose dark neck Beauty resorts, who carries the (Sesa) serpent in his arm, and who wears a garland of skulls hanging from his matted hairs.

May that Hara, along with (his consort Gauri), the goddess born of the cool mountain (the Himalaya), who keeps the Bull under control of his feet, bestow happiness on you; — (Hara) by whom the army of the gods was at first put to hardship by his burning of the Love-god (lit, the god possessing arrows of uneven number i.e. five)!

May the sun, who causes blooming beauty to lotuses, (or who causes the goddess Kamalalaya to manifest herself in lotuses), bestow welfare on you; — (the god) into whom enters the moon at its complete decline (i.e. on the amabasya day), by collecting together its (own) light!

There was the King, named Iksvaku, the light of his (Sun’s) race, who was Dharma incarnate, (and) whose pure fame, having crossed the sea, also shone over the earth.

By him (Iksvaku), who possessed the strength of a mountain (or of Visnu, the lord of Laksmi), who was the ornament of the race of kings, who was the master of fortunes, and who had the Earth for his wife (or chief consort), was borne (the burden of) the earth, as far as the seas.

In the family of this king (Iksvaku, as well as Dharmapala) who was the supporter of the earth, were born kings who, by their fame as well as by (or, as by) the river of the gods (Ganga), became themselves pure (lit. white), crossed the oceans and sanctified the three worlds.

These kings (both of the Iksvaku and Pala dynasties) bore (the burden of) the earth, and were ever inclined to raise the qualified persons (who were ornaments) to their masters and lower those who, by their own nature, accumulated vices and ruined their own families; (they also) supported the heaven (by means of sacrifices).

In that family, a mine of jewels (i.e. eminent personages), it is reported, was born king Dasaratha, whose house was resorted to by Hari (= Rama), who reared (the latter’s) person, (or, whose valour was adored by Indra for co-operation in battle; or, who offers protection to those who surrender arms in battle), and before whom other kings bowed down.

That (king, Dasaratha), by whose co-operation the hand of the gods (lit. enemies of demons) had not to feel fatigued and by whom Karna was surpassed on account of his unexpected (or undelayed) charities, ruled over the earth with the wealth of his youth and became a companion of Indra (Vrsan).

Then (four) sons were born to him (Dasaratha), viz, Rama, who ruled over the earth, protected the gods, was an incarnation of Purusottama (Hari), whose appearance (in human form) was made possible by the glowing Rsyasrnga (sage) (performing a sacrifice), and who owed his birth to a portion of cara (sacrificial offering); (and) Bharata, the only competent person to offer protection to the world, whose spirit, like a great fire, (burst forth) just in time, and (the third) Laksmana; and (the fourth) whose appellation was Satrughna.

Like the Visnu (Vamana) who eclipsed the glory of Bali, amongst the chief gods, Brahma (ka) and others, Rama, the eldest amongst those (four) sons, shone as the mighty rescuer of the earth sunk under the weight (of oppression) of the Lord of Lanka (Ravana).

Having obtained whom (Rama), his wise mother, Kosala, drew him to her arms thrilled (with joy) and appeared brilliant, (because this son was known to her as an incarnation of Vasudeva) — one in many respects sinless, riding the large bird (Garuda) and supporting all people (or, having obtained him, the city of Kosala appeared beautiful).

This person (Rama, as well as Ramapala) had never any sin or misery, crippled the power of those kings who acted as impediments to (the interests of) the whole world, had his palms wet in waters mixed with kusa grass and tila seeds, while engaged in acts of charities and had rendered his enemies powerless.

Who (Rama, as well as Rampala), — although he held no thunderbolt in his hand, killed no Bala, was no king of the gods, performed not many a sacrifice, could neither be called Gotrabhid nor Pakasasana (and thus had no characteristics of Indra) — was (yet) like Sunasira (Indra) himself.

Whom the Creator created as a single object, combining within himself (the spirit of the Lokapalas or quarter-regents), Indra, the Fire-god, Yama, the moon, Varuna, the Wind-god, Kubera and the Sun.

Who, having resembled Brahma (Vidhi) in that he had the goddess Sarasvati (Bharati) located in his mouth, possessed a seat in himself for Laksmi (Kamala), was the lord of beings and was born of a ksatriya king,- was the upholder of the world.

Who resembled Hara in being one deserving the use of such epithets as Sankara etc. — i.e. who was the director of bliss, the lord of speech, all-knowing, the abode of all blessings, preventing injury (caused by destiny or the enemy), the follower of moral law and who (as such) attained a supreme position amongst kings.

Enough of prolixity! he (Rama, as well as Ramapala) was a (veritable) incarnation of Hari, because his fame, charity and mercy were great and marvellous, and his spirit was high-soaring and shining, in as much as it could prevent (the assault from) powerful enemies and cause delight to the world.

On being approached by the son of Gadhi, bewildered (or hastening) on account of fear from the Raksasas, he (Rama) proceeded towards the distant hermitage (of the ascetic) with pleasure, equipped with arms, accompanied by Laksmana, being desirous of offering protection.

The power competent to offer proper protection to the world, arose in him (Rama), who attained great strength after having acquired the knowledge of weapons and the lores (Bala-vidya and Atibala-vidya) from Visvamitra whom he pleased, and who rent asunder the demoness Tadaka by his arrows.

By him (Rama, the incarnation of Hari) was rescued, by means of his power, Gotami (Ahalya), fallen and sunk into the darkness (of sin) on account of the vice of his (Hari’s) elder brother (Indra), who took to an immoral conduct, while dwelling in the other (upper) world (i.e. heaven).

Rama, whose joy was enhanced by (observing) the excellent hermitage of Visvamitra (Kusika’s son), caused the destruction of (Marica), the son of Tadaka, and cut down the body of Subahu (the demon).

He (Rama) reduced the large army of the Raksasas which threw the moral or religious law into confusion and thus delighted the Brahmanas; by taking up the bow with its fully drawn string (so as to form a circle) and having properly performed sacrifices he supported the world.

By him (Rama), thus taking up the protection of the sacrificial ground, was concluded the work (of sacrifices) undertaken by Kausika, which supported the gods by the residues of sacrifices, in which the son of Sumitra (Laksmana) acted as a servant, and from which the enemies were driven away.

This (Rama) in the company of Kausika (as leader), with his large (right) arm feeling a sensation of itching for drawing the string of the bow of Hara (Bhima), felt delight on reaching the country of Videha (Mithila).

Moreover, he (Rama), of unparalleled strength, broke asunder quickly with the playful movement of his shoot-like hands, the huge bow of Hara (Bhava) in a manner putting to shame all other princes, and (thus) delighted Janaka.

This (Rama), who (as Visnu incarnated) was the younger brother to Indra, (the king of gods), fittingly married Janaki, who was Laksmi herself. Her other sisters also became the charming wives to his other younger brothers, (performing) their nuptial ceremonies.

He (Rama) destroyed, by means of his military art, the (chance of) residence in heaven of (Parasurama), the enemy of the thousand-armed king (Karttaviryya), who took possession of the whole earth again and again (i.e. twenty-one times) by killing the Ksattriya rulers.

Intent on fulfilling his obligation to his wicked mother (Kaikeyi), he (Rama) proceeded towards the Dandaka forest, being accompanied by his most valiant younger brother (Laksmana), and with splendour enhanced by his virtuous wife whose request (to follow him) was complied with (lit. who was obeyed).

At first, his (Rama’s) father, the lord of the earth, having died and his brother, Bharata, having taken up the burden of (rule of) the earth in which no creator of disturbance remained, and having (thus himself) assumed the authority that belonged to Rama; —

But Rama, the large-hearted, forgiving, having turned an ascetic, and (as such) having hastened to the Citrakuta mountain, so hard with series of uneven rocks as its pavement;—

(Rama) having taken up residence, along with his other brother (Laksmana), in the terrible huge forest where housing was a difficult task, and also having in his company his wife, whose breasts were to be rent by the misconduct of the crow, as damned fate would have it; —

Rama) having rendered that crow one-eyed and having brought about the calamity (of death) to Viradha and Kabandha, and (then) having entered the hermitage of Pancavati by proceeding along the southern direction; —

(Rama) having humiliated (Surpanakha), the sister of that Raksasa (lit. the eater of flesh, i.e. Ravana), (the woman) who had a large number of kinsmen, with her nose and mouth deformed, on account of her having her face (disfigured) with nose severed from it and having brought about the death of Khara and caused the destruction of Dusana and Trisiras; —

(Rama) having torn asunder the array of troops (of Ravana) in Janasthana forest, having appointed his brother (Laksmana) for guarding Sita (lit. the daughter of the Earth), and having (himself) been dragged away by the greed of catching the illusory deer (i.e. Marica), fleet like the flash of lighting;—

(Rama’s) younger brother, (Laksmana), appointed to guard his (wife), having proceeded, to the same direction (as his brother), on account of the use of language of reproof by (Sita) (lit. the daughter of Earth), who, because of the sound, (uttered) by that rogue (Marica), suspected danger to her husband; —

His (Rama’s) wife, that divine (lady), the daughter of Jonahs, Sita by name, the ornament of his house, was stolen away by the mighty robber, the ten-headed demon (Ravana), under the guise of an ascetic.

Certainly that (lady, Sita), so eminent in beauty, became an object of protection (and no enjoyment) of that terrible (demon) who was a maker of Indra, whose younger brothers and sons became frightened (by his action) and who knocked down the chief of birds (Jatayu).

Then having killed Marica, that Rama, whose wife had been lost to him and who (therefore) possessed a pair of powerless (or idle) arms, thought, along with his younger brother (Laksmana), of his own cottage (lit. residence) as empty.

Moreover, this (Rama) who lost (or was deprived of) his patience as well as all activities, and was inflamed by the fire of his intense anger, did not even know his body lying prostrate on earth at that time.

With the appearance of the calamity, (Rama) had his serious fit of unconsciousness removed by his only companion, his younger brother, with care and with a method which had a soothing effect, and having (thus) regained consciousness (he) rose up.

By him (Rama), being attentive to his object (of finding out) his beloved (Sita), the country, which was full of numerous hills and overspread with forests containing various and huge beasts of prey, was then traversed with difficulty.

He (Rama), with long arms, accepted, with approval, Sugriva (lit. the son of the sun-god), as one who, being the chief (lit. native) source of strength and having (as such) entered into friendship with him, approached (him) with a promise of help.

By that person (Rama) he (Sugriva) was propitiated by the killing of Balin (lit. the son of Indra) of great strength, (and) he largely achieved (thereby) very great power as (lit. in the rank of) the chief of the monkeys.

Then the great sea with its high and impassable waves was crossed over by (Hanumat), the son of the Wind-god begotten on the wife of Kesarin, who was strong, who drove away the chief Raksasas (lit. flesh-eaters), who was searching for his (Rama’s) consort by command of his own master (Sugriva), to whom were reported the whereabouts (of Sita) by the chief of birds (Sampatin), by whom was rent asunder the Mahendra (mountain) under the pressure of his unbearably heavy strides and who looked endowed with lustre.

In course of the search Sita (was found out) and waited upon by that (Hanumat) possessing the lustre of the sun, while she was in the clutches of the fierce demons and remained terrified, with nothing except mere breath of life left to her, and feeling wretched on account of her bewilderment by the multitude of objects of the senses (heaped round her).

She (Sita) having been consoled by means of message, that enemy’s (Ravana’s) park along with the arrays of its guards was shattered, and his city, named Lanka, was also burnt down (by that Hanumat).

Thus having fulfilled the command and returned, he (Hanumat), the killer of Aksa, who showed (Rama) her token (of recognition), announced to her husband Janaki as situated in that condition and lying on (bare) ground.

Canto II:

This Rama (also, Ramapala), of great majesty, with visible bristling hairs (on his body i.e. with a thrill of joy), having his heroic strength (or enthusiasm) running high with courage, anger and pride, made strenuous exertion towards victory over his enemy.

The monkey heroes, — quite competent to pull up mountains, with their vigour doubly increased by the encouragement from (Hanumat), the son of Wind, and with great merriment, having been joined by the forces of Nila and Angada, lending their support to Kumuda, having enormous strength (or moving with great speed), accompanied by Nala, Prthu and Rambha, meeting Rabhasa, united with the armies of Tara, Puskara, Gaja and others, raising together a tumultuous uproar, clapping (their hands), shaking their hard palms and tails, with their thunderbolt-like claws which they used as weapons, and (being led) by the brilliant Jambavat (the chief of the bears), — resorted to Rama.

He (Rama) was competent to conquer the world, having been followed by those (armies of monkeys) of great strength, who were of adorable virtues, possessed of the valour of lions, the very jewels among heroes, and having the energy (or brilliance) of the sun.

Rama, whose face resembled the moon, who achieved victory over Parasurama by whom Arjima (Karttaviryarjuna) was cut to pieces, and who was the promoter of the interests of his supplicants, relied on the support of the strong arms of his extremely devoted and unequalled younger brother (Laksmana).

Also, he (Rama), whose arrays of picked monkeys were constructed by (Sugriva), the son of the sun-god (lit. the hot-rayed one), and who urged on tumultuous army which defied his enemies, was unequalled and (looked) smart on the battle-field.

He (Rama), on the other hand, looked upon his own two large arms as his allies, which possessed of the strength of the (Mandara) mountain that churned the milk ocean, and which would conquer (Ravana), the unscrupulous warrior of the hostile dominion.

Then having led this vast army, that Rama of exceedingly wonderful valour, having maintained his strength and conducted a safe passage (of the army across the ocean), shone, as he ably faced the foe.

The huge army, of him (Rama) marching against his enemy, having been protected from danger by (Sugriva), the son of the sun-god, there arose a shrill shout, indicative of mirth, resounding all the quarters.

He (Rama), the great hero, while putting in order and encamping those armies competent to go everywhere, covered the other coast of the great ocean.

(A bridge), which was undertaken (to be built) by those great warriors (Hanumat and others), by whom huge and distant hills were hurled up root and branch, by means of their large arms appearing like shoots of thunderbolt (or hatchet), whose (ever) youthful forearms5 [Can the second line of verse 12 be interpreted as follows: -- "by whom the large rooms (of the residences) of gods (living in mountains) were caused to be removed into waters on account of the digging up of the hard hills"? -- R.G.B.] felt quite chafed (or irritated) in pulling up the hard hills, who (thus) removed obstruction to the view of the nether world (lit. the world of the Nagas), who well devised (the plan of) the destruction of the demons and who put forth excessive efforts (to that end).

(A bridge), which caused to the fish a great disturbance in their own regions by the hills (thrown into the sea), on account of which the large aquatic animals were moving at (great) speed, which was crowded by the distracted flocks of (aquatic) birds and which was striking constantly against the skate-fish.

(A bridge), which came in terrible collision with the hosts of alligators and sharks moving with their fearfully gaping mouths, by which the earth was delighted, and by which the great bulk of high waves of the ocean was passed over and checked.

(A bridge), in (the construction of) which the strength of the monkey troops, who surpassed the speed of the wind, was known (or recognised), on account of which the flocks of Ati-birds were dislodged from their resorts, by which the water-elephants with flowing ichor were crushed, and by which the waters (of the sea) with many (aquatic) birds were broken through.

(A bridge), which, by reason of its hasty construction with rocks, made the aquatic animals (so many) lifeless corpses, by means of which the chief enemy (Ravana) was reached, and from which the energetic whales of incomparably huge bodies met with a check to their strength.

(A bridge), a much trodden one, by which conches and clouds were dispersed on account of their striking against the rocks, which moved up by the stirring of hills, and which caused the waters (of the ocean), having tremendous formations, to dance.

(A bridge) which helped a restoration of the world’s blessings, which was the (veritable) Meru mountain having jewels easy to attain, which was the Kailasa mountain (lit. the silver mount) presenting itself, and which was the ocean god himself (the source of all gems) called by up Hara, and which enabled Indra to arrange for the enjoyment of love of the heavenly damsels (made prisoners by Ravana).

That terrible ocean was bound over by Rama, who had a reliable follower in (Vibhisana), the second (uterine) brother of (Ravana), the lord of the demons (lit. flesh-eaters), having constructed a bridge of rocks (over it).

(That ocean) by resorting to which alone, as he was the preserver of waters, the winged mountains obtained their own protection (from the attacks of) Indra (Jisnu), who was their enemy.

(That ocean)— into which thousands of rivers (flowing) from the wingless mountains, running on irresistibly, enter, on all sides, united with all sorts of currents.

(That ocean) — the abode of waters, the source of all gems, in which Laksmi herself, as well as the Parijata (tree), the chief horse (Uccaihsravas), the chief elephant (Airavata) and other things lived.

(That ocean), by resorting to whom, Laksmi was obtained by Visnu (Visvambhara) and nectar by the gods, and Sambhu (Siva) got the moon.

(That ocean), the original home of the Kalpa tree, depending on which (for their waters), the clouds seeking the good of others resuscitated the entire earth, after having ascended the sky (lit. the path of Achyuta or Visnu).

(The ocean) bright with pearls, in the interior of which that (much) adored god (Visnu), having for his emblem Garuda (lit. the chief of birds), was himself present, lying on Sesa (the lord of serpents), attended by Laksmi.

(The ocean), which earned the epithet, of mahasaya (a great receptacle), and shone as a vast sheet of water, surpassing the walls of the different quarters by its (volume of) waters, (but yet) never transgressing its own limits, in which snakes have formed a great stronghold, and the swelling of which was caused by the moon (lit. the lord of the stars).

The Suvela mountain, situated on the other side, was occupied by him (Rama), after having crossed over the ocean by means of (the bridge of) rocks and caused delight by tidings to Sita (the daughter of Janaka) who was abandoned to her fate.

(The mountain), the uneven or formidable ridges of which were ground (to dust) by the stamping of the redoubtable armies of Rama, and the elephants of which (therefore) took recourse to the speed of their legs for retreat as the (only means) to safety.

That (mountain), which was left by lions, from which buffaloes fled away, the foot-hills of which were shaken and summits struck down and which had the whole expanse of its forests divested of beauty and made perishable on account of the fury of the attack.

All at once, (that mountain) became devoid of its association with birds and antelopes, where the serpents were killed, and in which the dens of ferocious animals were destroyed, the rhinoceroses etc. dispersed and bears lost their (own) places.

(That mountain), of which a changed condition was brought about with regard to its circles of huge boulders which were thrown down, numerous waterfalls and rows of bowers, and which contained an increasing uproar (of the monkey force) in its reverberated lines of caves, and which became greatly agitated in (all) its caves or hollows.

People also saw that (mountain) having its neighbouring gardens without their leaves, sprouts, trunks etc., coloured with various metallic ores and with all its mines destroyed.

That (mountain) was soon bereft of beauty, because such of its parts as peaks and table-lands, of gold, silver and jewels, were injured by the followers of the chief of monkeys who mercilessly trod upon (them).

Thus in that (mountain), they (the monkeys?), now the paramours of the damsels of gods, vidyadharas and gandharvas, felt (rather) disconsolate, though their dalliance was sustained (?) by rise of passion inflamed by (their taking of) Kalpa wine.

Then at once Angada (lit. the son of Indra’s son i.e. Bali) who was (always) respectful, was despatched by Rama, with great speed, into the presence of Ravana (lit. the younger-brother of Kubera, the lord of wealth).

He, (Angada) though honoured with a hospitable reception, did not obtain the desired object (i.e. Sita’s release) from this demon (Ravana). Angada, having thwarted the attempt of the enemies, (and approaching him) with a salutation made Sugriva (lit. the son of the Sun-god) rejoice.

Then a dreadful army, with its strength not to be measured by the great flesh-eating demons, was raised by him (Rama), who had the monkey-chief (Sugriva) as his ally and who had thoroughly laid a seize to the enemy's territory.

Rama’s army, which desired to be augmented by the monkey troops, setting at naught the (inaccessible; mountainous tracts with great enthusiasm, by which (army) chains of mountains were uprooted, hurled off and made to collide with one another.

(Rama’s army)— very brilliant, in the neighbourhood of which Raksasas were moving about in great excitement, by which even the mountains were spilt up by means of large shafts, by which the whole host of the ten-headed monster's offsprings were dispersed, and in whose (heart) very high hopes were raised.

(Rama’s army) — which was quite impervious, with its array of foot-soldiers, treated with filial affection and which repeatedly threw off obstruction to each other, acting like Destiny itself, intent on destroying lives.

(Rama's army) which caused rivers of blood to flow on, which was strewn over with the heads and trunks of the vanquished forces, and by which great archers were hurled into the jaws of Death (lit. the buffalo-riding god).

There, in the midst of the demons, the enemies of the universe, shone Laksmana, the brother of the blessed one (Rama), by whom the most valiant Kumbhakarna was shorn of his greatness, on his body being cut to pieces.

The world-conquering lance (Sakti) of (Ravana), the conqueror of Indra, stuck to (the heart of) Laksmana, his (Rama’s) younger brother. The latter, too, fainted therewith and laid his body prostrate on the ground.

Whereupon the enemy, who was the conqueror of Indra and who assumed illusory appearances, was led to the abode of Death (i.e. killed) by that valorous Laksmana, who was cured of the swoon by the son of the Wind-god (Hanumat), who had uprooted and carried away the large mountain (Gandhamadana), having walked (thither) with very great speed, and provided for the life-restoring (lit. supreme) drug (growing therein).

Some calamity, which was well understood by Rama and which was only (faintly) guessed by the ten-headed monster, grew thick. For, the latter had to see with his own eyes the disaster of the severing of his own heads (as they were cut off one by one).

Then by him (Rama) was caused the death of the king of Lanka — who, clotted with the thick mass of blood streaming out from the line of the hollows of his severed necks, was an object of a great merriment to the flock of birds (or the multitude of gods) sporting in the sky — whose relations had already been slain — and who, having his strength in his Chandrahasa sword, was putting up a terrible fight.

Canto III:

Having drawn her (near him), he (Rama) accepted, when obtained from the fire-god, his dearest wife (Sita), not born from (any human) womb and the (prospective) mother of (his) children, who was pure though she long dwelt in the land of the Raksasas.

(Sita) — whose purity of thought was vouched for by the gods, doing good to all — associated with them were Brahma (lit, the father of Sarasvati), Siva the terrible Lord, and Visnu, who is the Lord of bliss or protection; —

(Among whom were) the twelve Adityas appearing together with their consorts (or appearing in person), the most excellent gods shining high above; and who, being (the eye of the world) and the direct source of cognition, are the objects of the highest adoration; —

Those deities of luminous form, the eleven Rudras, joined by Skanda with Vinayaka, by the (eight) Vasus, and by the group of deities, the (ten) Visvas of far-extended sphere —

(the gods viz.) the presiding deities of the quarters, who were present there, having as their residence the altars in the lofty temples of that city (Lanka), where the houses (after the death of Ravana) were not threatened from any quarter.

(Sita) whose extreme faithfulness (to her lord) was established by the Brahmanas, endowed with the (six) superhuman powers, and at the same time most placid, and also by the great sages, the authoritative expounders of the Vedic lores in all their branches.

(Sita) who got stupefied even in the matter of her ordinary practices or in her (present) condition— round whom gathered the (storm of) passion of one (i.e. Ravana) whose (only) pleasure consisted in the oppression of the world -- who was (thus) doing great good to the world -- and whose great glory was proclaimed loudly by the (beatings of) drums.

(Sita) who was the abode of virtues beyond measure and became the impregnable house of truth and right conduct, whose pure character was declared by those who had a very high reputation for their holy deeds.

(Sita), who was born in the home of the Vedic lore (Brahman) (or born out of the sacrificial ground), who fell unconscious as the effect of the scorching poison of (humiliation attended with scandal) and became thin and emaciated and who, on account of her very fearful habitation (in the midst of the demons), wearing away flesh, which admitted of no sleep, felt her body, (once) so crimson-coloured, like a great burden.

(Sita) — who was in all respects as holy as the inestimable stream of waters of Ganga at the source, and who was internally pure and bright through the “great sacrifice” (which means the great knowledge of truth) leading to final release from rebirth.

(Sita) who, moreover, became very thin and emaciated through fear of the huge hordes of the Kaccha country (of the south), and was able to raise herself only with the help of her female companion (Sarama) -- (or on whom blackness was visibly growing up) -- and who was found in the Asoka grove, surrounded by the senseless Raksasas, (lit. eaters of raw flesh).

(Sita who was meditating on Rama),— the most pre-eminent person, as (if) made up of the dense rows of cloud, whose mouth was ceaselessly musical on account of sweet (sound of his) throat and who had (his belly marked with) beautiful waving folds of skin; -- the meditation on her Lord being accompanied by a tremor in her Bilva-like breasts.

(Rama) as one growing in strength and (exquisitely beautiful) with his lips sharing the glow of new shoots of leaves, with his eyes pouring out, as it were, a shower of nectar (or water), with his curly hair playing on his forehead, and who was resting on the waves of his deep sighs —and further as one who, with the (strength) of fighting many an elephant, surpassed Indra in energetic action.

(Rama) with whom her union (in spirit) was established— by the “accessory” sentiments surging within her, associated with which were sloth, sickness of heart, fatigue, despondency and sadness, and which started with (apparent) insanity, insensibility, reflection, anxiety and self-disparagement, as well as by the external manifestations, in which was (evident) the great thrill of joy (all over the body) and among which were the actions of mind, intellect, body and speech — all of them expressing great distress.

(Sita) bearing in her mind her beloved Lord Rama, who was adored by gods and who was sustaining his life which was fixed upon the place of his beloved (Sita) and which was (considered) an evil, it being joyless and quite pitiable.

(Sita) who was regarded as the most shining crest-jewel of the line of Iksvaku on account of her grace, the fascinating charm of which was hailed or esteemed in numerous ways by the host of other kings (assembled in her svayamwara meeting) and which was further augmented by her high lineage.

(Sita) the acquisition of whose precious property (Cudamani) came from the sacrifice of (Indra) the mighty conqueror of the demon named Bala— who lay down on the earth, who was destined always to accomplish the greatest good of the earth, and who owed her birth (directly) to mother Earth.

(Sita) who was the only instrument for the fulfilment of the task of the host of gods which was unequalled on earth in the point of its fruitfulness, and who destined not to remain (ever) in the country of the meanest enemies, (therefore) attained fruitfulness though she was in this world with her face wet with tears.

(Sita) who was wearing garlands of large Malati, fine Nagakesara and excellent Vakula flowers, by whom was caused to all in this world the greatest of rejoicings, and who caused the destruction of the enemies (Raksasas) who were given to much drinking.

(Sita) who was carrying (in her hand) a Kesara flower, with bees hovering (near) on account of its very sweet fragrance, which was reddish-white as (her own) lotus-like palm, and who was retaining only a streak of her (former) lovely features which, one can not set a limit to by words for their symmetry.

(Sita) whose beauty resembling that of golden ketaka was terror-stricken— who was intensely adored all over the world — and whose breath was as cool and fragrant as the water abounding in lotuses, red and blue.

(Sita) the grace of whose person possessed the exquisite charms of the moon's digit, and the breadth of whose breasts, high, plump and closely set, would suggest simile with a pair of golden pitchers joined together.

(Sita) whose hair resembled fine peacock’s tail, the luster of whose forehead resembled the brilliance of the moon, whose figure (lit. limbs) appeared drooping down, who had thinness in waist and the grace in the pair of whose eyes, reaching right up to the ears, turned downward.

(Sita) who shone with her good and bright line of hair, who possessed folds of skin in her belly not separated from each other, who had her fore-arms as soft as the fibre of a lotus, and who possessed a (beautiful) expanse of well developed hips.

(Sita) who had the charming swan’s gait (or the gait of a huge she-elephant), whose hips were broad and had a pleasing sight, who had a great and sacred history and has eclipsed even the Lord of the night i.e. the moon (in glory or loveliness), and who excelled by her own eyes (the beauty of) the blue lotuses.

(Sita) who, (roughly) handled as she was, by the wicked (Raksasas), was led out of compassion by the tender support of the hands of her Lord, and who, therefore, felt greatly honoured — and whose sorrow due to the enemy’s fire of passion was removed at once.

(Sita) to whose feet the high-born and pious people at once made many obeisances.

He (Rama) made Lanka appear like the peak of Meru — (Lanka) which equalled Amaravatl, which was made the abode of many persons of great affluence and in which place distress was unknown, and which was crowded by gods, who are gratified with the clarified butter offered (to them in sacrifices), unobstructed.

(Lanka) which was the dwelling place of Raksasas, but which was yet without any talk about impious conduct, in which place men felt enraptured with conversation held among themselves, (as it) granted protection to all, and which place counted among its residents the exalted class of gods.

(Lanka) — which, attended to (by him), appeared as the veritable city of the lord of gods as it contained abundant clusters of jewels, which, having among its residents many charming young women, was so very auspicious, and which was bathed as it were in the nectar of the benign government of Vibhisana.

And he (Rama), by whom the monkey chief (Sugriva) was surrounded with immense wealth and raised to a high dignity, made Lanka appear like the peak of the Meru (mountain) as it contained rows of houses made of gold.

(At that palace which was the very source of joy) on account of the ornaments set with diamonds, lapis lazuli, pearls, emeralds, rubies and sapphires, with a network of shoots of rays being beautifully diffused into the sky— and with articles (of furniture) made of gold with fine artistic designs, and also many charming necklaces with central gems and pure pearls of round shape.

Also on account of many variegated costly garments of fine texture, and also musk, black aloe, sandal, saffron and camphor —and (again) on account of the pleasing notes of the different musical instruments which were sonorous, deep and sweet, and which produced a full effect through the acquisition of the harmony with the vocal music and which excelled (even) the performances of Tumburu, the celestial musician.

Also on account of the youthful heavenly courtezans who had great passion of love (surging in their breast), and who were dancing passionately while they were wearing their (suitable) apparels and while their jewelled anklet-bells were tinkling sweetly on.

Also on account of the large number of territories which were being enjoyed in due seasons, which became highly productive and which had (as their distinctive features) lines of thousands of impetuously sporting she-buffaloes, the exultant bulls and milch cows.

Here (at Lanka) in a palace crowded by the Raksasas that was built up by Visvakarman,-- which attained perfection of grandeur and where no fraud was being practised, and which place was the one source of gaieties, being furnished with the gems of all sorts, luxuries of many kinds and many nice things for diversion and merriment (as described before), which were respectfully presented by the kings,— the two mighty chiefs, (Rama and Sugriva), like the twin gods, Asvins, met each other and shone for a long time in each other's close embrace.

By that king of sweet disposition (Rama), the union of three, (Sugriva, Angada and Vibhisana), as the recipient of his blessings, was placed amidst divine showers of flowers over the heads of the host of kings.

That King, Rama made the ocean itself, with the great construction of a causeway with the chains of large mountains and palm trees, filled up like an ordinary tank.

By him (Rama), who was capable of bearing the burden of heaven with perfect ease, this earth was made full of many greatly enjoyable objects and rendered light in weight by (bringing about) stability in the Great-forest area (of the South) and free from all evils.

Who (Rama) was propitiated for his own protection by (Indra), the guardian of the Eastern quarter, who rode on the excellent elephant (Airavata), by means of his armour, as well as by offering his own chariot.

He (Rama) with his elation checked, treated with kindness his wife, who would be the mother of (heroic) sons (who would be) ornaments to the world; and having entered into war stamped out the demons and gave protection to the entire world.

That king (Rama), when his shoulder was fastened and pressed by the serpents (i.e., serpent-noose), was pleased by the king of birds (Garuda) who, with a will to serve him, came to his rescue.

Did not the king or Vibhisana who conquered passion, abstained from the objects of sense, such as rupa etc., and was to be treated with high consideration attain the glory of him (Rama (?)), striving to govern his subjects universal satisfaction.

Thus, that (king, Rama), having taken her (Sita) with him returned to Ayodhya — which was (1) fit to be enjoyed by the king of kings, and (2) was immensely rich on account of its various hidden treasures, and was like Alaka which was (1) fit to be enjoyed by Kubera, the Lord of the Yaksas and was (2) excessively rich on account of Sevadhi (treasures), and which was full of young women.

Canto IV:

That king, Rama, staying there (in Ayodhya), enjoyed long in the company of his lovely spouse by the provision of various sorts of objects of enjoyment -- after his kingdom had been returned to him by his brother (Bharata).

That virtuous consort of the mighty lord, now feeling the pleasure of enjoying the heavenly objects, was not at any place or at any time tolerated by that (king), as having her conduct called in question by wicked persons.

It was with great difficulty that on his command, his brother (Laksmana) promptly and skilfully led the "jewel wombed" daughter of Janaka to the forest, with Sumantra accepting the charioteer's office.

Then on hearing the command of the king she (Sita) fell into a swoon, and having regained her consciousness, related to Laksmana about her carrying child in her womb, with a heavy flow of tears coming out of her eyes.

(Sita) with her mind, fixed on (Ramacandra) as the protector from fear, whose lamentation filled with acute grief the entire world, and who possessed a figure which excelled that of the Cupid.

Ramacandra took under his protection that lovely boy (Kusa), with his younger brother, who had sung the history of Rama i.e. the Ramayana, and who, having his sonship recognised, was appointed governor of his state.

The Lord of the earth (Rama) was pleased with him in a manner which caused the heart-burning of the enemies’ hearts (lit. tearing enemies’ hearts)— he, being possessed of all the fine arts, gratifying the (Naga) Kumuda, (by name) and bursting open the interior of the rocks by arrows.

The Kala (Purusa) having arrived, (Laksmana) the vanquisher of the conqueror of Indra, whose bond of engagement was violated on account of Durvasas' (importunities), consigned his mortal frame to the river (Saraya) by a staircase filled in with the river-water.

Then realising his self (as no other than Narayana) by the message of Brahman, he, a most charitable lord of earth, made up his mind (to die), with a joyful heart, as his mission (on earth) was fulfilled, and started for the great river (Sarayu).

While the crowd of people in great sorrow was weeping, Rama, the Paramatman Himself, returned to his own abode (i.e. attained heaven), having plunged into the holy river (Sarayu) -- alas! that was a sight quite unbearable -- along with all his dependants.

Then his younger brother, Bharata, the saviour (of mankind), who had, since his boyhood, encountered great obstacles to his earthly happiness, attained heaven on his giving up the mortal frame, after having successfully ruled the kingdom.

His younger brother, Satrughna, the ruler of earth, also died of the great affliction and went to heaven. This (death) of the slayer of the son of Kumbhinasi (i.e. Lavanasura) occurred as the result of the compact (made).

The other worthy and blessed son of that king Rama -- the Incarnation of the Destroyer of demons, Kusa by name, who was, as it were, the very root of joy sprouting up for all his subjects, possessed all auspicious marks of a king, was the best type of man, conquered the group of six internal foes, dispelled the darkness of the world, and was a hero of the Dhirodatta type —became without fear the exhilarating Lord of Earth with ocean as her belt, while extricating the dart of grief resulting from the loss of Rama.

(To Madana (Cupid) associated with his friend and ally, the Moon,) who with the yajnas (vitanas) held in his honour with ample provisions for abhiseka, is always going forward in filling up all quarters, showing all objects to the fullest advantage, and causing delight to all men by offering protection to the helpless persons.

The moon) who (by his rise) obscures with ease the mighty solar disc, which is the invigorator of the great multitude of lotus plants, and who plays the prominent part of being the sole contributor to the eminence of beauty to Mahadeva (the 'moon-crested’ god).

(The moon), that great Lord in the midst of a far-extending halo, who shines excessively, whose glory reaches its climax with the touch of night, and whose splendour lies in guarding his own men who are twice-born.

(The moon), who is born of the highest caste (he being the son of Atri and the king of Brahmanas, Dvijaraja), is fit to be worshipped according to the Vedic formulas, is beautiful and of round shape, who is Cupid’s (Madana’s) companion, and is the only hope1 [The moon being the Lord of the plant world is said here to be the "only hope" for the flower plants.] for the effulgent beauty of (Cupid’s flowery) weapons and by whom those who are greatly fatigued, are relieved and held up.

(Madana), associated with the moon as his friend and ally, who, that luminary of white rays, is the light of the world, who is (liable to be) assailed by Rahu and who is the physician (in possession) of the secret of the preventing of the opening of the lotuses.

Was it not a fact that the fortune of world-conquest came to Madana, who was restored to the beauty of his form through the grace of the lotus-like feet of Candi, and was domineering over all corporeal beings?

Kusa, again was (quite happy) with the serpent world which was in complete peace with him, after having accepted, as his wife, Kumuda’s sister, who rose from the river and was fit to bear offspring, which was fearless.

That mind-born deity, who was the father of Aniruddha, had weapons of odd number, was the lover of Rati, and made the rustic (or the vulgar) people quite restless, united himself with the supreme season of flowers.

Who was not shaken off from his inborn fortitude by him (Cupid), who humbled the pride of the young damsels? He, who with manifest strength (or having displayed his valour) is without mercy towards his enemies, has beaten on (hitherto) unbeaten and un-injured.

That you (Kusa as well as Madanapala) are Madana is false. For, while you are non-violent by nature, “Mara” (the violent) is the name of Madana; while you are free from passion, Kama (or passion) is another name of Madana; while you (by means of irrigation) maintain a good and increasing supply of water (which they call Sambara) the latter (Madana) is the sworn enemy of Sambara; while you hold the seven angas (limbs or constituent parts of a State) all intact, the latter has lost all his limbs (Ananga).

By him, again, his enemy was left destitute with all the seven limbs of his state destroyed by means of the former's blissful state-policy, (while Madana had all his limbs destroyed by (the fire from) the eyes of Sankara; (while Madana’s arrows are limited to five), innumerable are the arrows of this (king), that spread death (lit. the state of being resolved into the five elements) among his enemies.

Balarama, impetuous in his strength, snatched away wine from the mouth of his dear one (Revati); and on account of the insolence of his enemies, his weapon, (the formidable) plough-share was led through the river Yamuna, overcoming its hostile waves; and a human from in distress (which was assumed by the river Yamuna) was dragged (near himself).

This king (Kusa) -- the protector of his subjects, -- had absolutely pure food and garments furnished at the right moment. He was not addicted to women, was not indulging in lasciviousness and was the second Rama, (his father being the first).

Rama (his father), again, was (the incarnation of Hari) other than Rama, "the Protector of Kama", had his release from the veil of time well effected, and when bereaved of Laksmi i.e. Sita, his consort, took charge of his sons.

Vrsa or Indra is the thousand-eyed deity, and is contented with his due share in the sacrifices. He is the destroyer of his enemies (the Asuras), the cleaver of the wings of mountains, and maintains his superb rank, with his son, Jayanta, shining out.

The fire, -- which (owes its strength to wood or) has its strength rising in proportion to the wood (supplied to it), whose flames, when (fed up) by butter rise up to a great splendour and which has its glow spreading on high — has no existence like the “sky-flower”, if not fed by straw.

The veritable Dharmaraja (Yama), the lotus-feet of whom are made the ornaments of its head by his buffalo, who delights the sun-god (his father); he, as the Dispenser of justice3, [It may be noted here that in mediaeval iconography of Bengal, the god, Yama, is shown as holding evenly in his hand a balance (undoubtedly the balance of justice.] is called ‘Dharmaraja'; holding the balance even, he is called ‘Samavarti'; and wielder of the rod, he is known as ‘Dandadhara’.

May the demon (Nairrta) who is riding Kumuda, (his favourite elephant), desirous of leading other night-rovers, frightening (all) in the extreme by devouring dead bodies in great number,— be merry.

Pracetas (the god, Varuna) protects one who is devoted (and invokes his mercy) and abides by the ordinance (relating to Varuna-puja), who also protects the (western quarter) and the man who is helpless and begs for his mercy and in whose region the Brahma (lit. the poet-sovereign) was born.

The well-known Wind-god who blows among the rows of flower plants, is a great object of attraction to a species of deer. He is, again, one by whom the large Gajari trees (or the rogues of elephants) are rendered restless by breaking them down and rocking them to and fro.

(He is as Kubera)— (lit. a devotee of Siva), takes his residence in the white mountain (Kailasa) and possesses treasures, called nidhis, which are praised for their many excellences. He alone shines on the shoulder of (his favourite elephant) Sarvabhauma.

Isa (Isana = Mahadeva) amuses that great Goddess of the river, held on the matted hair and skull, who is known as Bhogavati (in the lower world), who is Suranadi or Mandakini, (in heaven), and who being watched (by all) pervades the entire mortal world (and is known as Bhagirathi).

That (Vasuki), the Lord of the nether world, is the leader of the great army of the stupendous-sized serpents, and is adhered to as one, who bears (on his head) the mother earth, and on whom Hari with Laksmi sleeps.

(Brahma) with his submissive row of swans (as his vehicle) is called “the Grand Old God”, “the world's grand sire”, and “the Preserver”. He is praised as the Artist, who in His omnipotence (lit. whose omnipotence) has drawn the pictures of various worlds in the universe (Brahmanda).

While the Sun-god of the world is shining causing the day-lotuses to bloom and night lilies to fade, the horizon becomes starless, the moon disappears, and (thus) his ascendency is well-established (lit. well done).

The moon who is attached to the bright half of the month and who has deer as a mark on his disc, does not make the day-lotuses bloom and decorates the sky (lit. the pathway of the gods) which is sacred.

In this way always he (Kusa as well as Madanapala,) shines, assuming the role of fulfilling the hopes of all, as one striving to get to the good old kings (as his ideal), and as one who represents the sum total of the religious merits (of his subjects).

Or he (Kusa) being the son of Rama, the incarnation of Purnsottama (Visnu) is himself also Purnsottama incarnate. — For (as the sruti says)-— ‘the (father's) self is reborn as the son'.

For, that one god, Visnu, has always on his hand the Nandaka (sword), carries — the excellent Pancajanya (conch) and is always with his beneficent Sudarsana (disc); and he bears the Kaumodaki (mace).

Ever triumphant is the Almighty (Visnu), mounted on Garuda (lit. the son of Vinata), the succourer with four arms wielding such weapons.

This (Purusottama), the delighter of the gods, wears an apparel which is of the golden hue and beautiful, and clasps Lakshmi to his bosom out of exuberance of love.

He with the epithets — "Lotus-eyed" "Lord of the all-pervading army”, "Indra’s uterine (younger) brother", “Imperishable" and “Almightly” — is served whole-heartedly by both Laksmi and Sarasvati.

By the fearless one (Purusottama) mount Govardhana was lifted up; after getting the Kaliya serpent under his control, he would not let (king) Kamsa live.

May this king (Kusa), the protector of his people, — who with his joyous exalted career is held in high esteem by the good and who being a liberal donor has his hands always wet while making gifts — rule long his kingdom with his great fame spread far and wide.
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 33177
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am


Return to Ancien Regime

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests