|
The Indian Analyst
|
North Indian Inscriptions |
LITERARY HISTORY (Text) âThe first and the third letters joined with the second and fourth of any series (that is to say, with any of the aspirates), such letters as are combined with r preceding or following or both, (the cerebrals) ṭ, ṭh, ḍ and ḍh,(even though uncombined with another consonant) and (the hard sibilants) ś and sh serve to manifest it (Vigour); so also an ample use of compounds, and a construction possessed of bombast.â (Commentary) ....................âFor example chañchad-bhuja etc.â If we now carefully consider the essential features of the Vaidarbhī and the Gauḍī Styles animadverted upon in the Sāhityadarpaṇa, no doubt can possibly arise as to Harishēṇa having composed his Kāvya after the Gauḍī model. The lengthy compounds with which the praśasti brims over, especially in the prose portion of it, are enough to brand it as Gauḍī. But Bühler has understood a verse of the Kāvyādarśa, wrongly we think, to mean that long compounds form the essence of prose to whatever school of composition it belongs. Even if we set aside the prose part of Harishēṇa’s Kāvya, his stanzas, we have already pointed out, are by no means free from long compounds. But long compounds are not only test of the Gauḍī style. Another characteristic of it is the combination of the first and third, with the second and fourth, letters of a series. If we take stanza 3, we note stabdh-ō0 and ōchchhṛi-0 as instances of it in line 5. In the stanza following we have uchchhvasitēshu in line 7. Stanza 5, again, has adbhut-ōdbhinna0 in line 9 and kēchich=chharaṇa0 in line 10. And even if we suddenly turn our attention to the last verse, that is, stanza 9, we meet with 0chchrita0 in line 30. As regards the occurrence of initial or subscript r or of ś and sh, the stanzas simply bristle with them. These characteristics of even the verse portion of the praśasti are destructive of Sweetness (mādhurya) which forms the essence of the Vaidarbhī, but are affluents of Vigour (Ōjas) which is the peculiar feature of the Gauḍī Style. And this is just what might be expected of this praśasti, which, being mainly descriptive of the exploits of Samudragupta, cannot but preponderate with the Heroic (Vīra) and the Furious (Raudra). The language appropriate for the delineation of these Sentiments must be one which is predominated with Vigour or Ōjas.
VATSABHAṬṬI’S POEM ABOUT THE SUN TEMPLE OF DAŚAPURA We now come to the treatment of the second inscription which Bühler has selected from
the Gupta period, with a view to set forth the history of the evolution of Artificial Poetry in
India.1 It was originally connected with the temple of the Sun erected by a Guild of Silk-weavers at Daśapura, modern Mandasōr. Who the author of the composition was is indicated
in verse 44 thereof, which unfortunately is wrongly translated even by Bühler. It may be
correctly rendered as follows: “By Vatsabhaṭṭi was caused to be made this edifice of the Sun
through the order of the Guild and through (his) devotion (to the god) and was composed with
care this descriptive statement (pūrvā).” In his translation of this passage Bühler fell into a
two-fold blunder. The first was in regard to the correct sense of the term pūrvā. That has been
indicated elsewhere in two places.2 The second blunder is in regard to the general interpreta- 1 Ind. Ant., Vol. XLII, pp. 137 ff.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| > |
|
>
|