North Indian Inscriptions

LITERARY HISTORY

pedients”¹ to achieve the end devoutly wished for. Both these feelings have been superbly depicted by the preposition ud in udvīkshitaḥ used by Harishēṇa with reference to the rival kinsmen of Samudragupta. Again, the word employed by him to denote rival kinsmen is tulya-kulaja, ‘born in the same family.’ This also is a most apt phrase denoting the Artha-guṇa or Merit of Sense called ōjas or Vigour. This ōjas, according to the Sāhityadarpaṇa, is svābhiprāyatvarūpam, ‘consisting in pregnancy of meaning.’² The implication conveyed by this expression is that the only qualification that Samudragupta’s rivals possessed was that they were his equals in birth. Though this stanza is thus a master-piece of a poem, it is not completely free from certain foibles of composition. Thus, in line 1, we have the phrases bhāva-piśunaiḥ and utkarṇitaiḥ, which are adjectives of rōmabhiḥ. Here utkarṇitai rōmabhiḥ without bhāvapiśunaiḥ would have been better. Because, as the Sāhityadarpana says, harsh-ādbhuta-bhay-ādibhyō rōmāñchō rōmavikriyā,³ “Horripillation is a change in regard to the hair of the body, caused by joy, surprise, or fear and so on.” In the present case we know that the hair of Samudragupta’s father, Chandragupta I, stood on end on account of delight. Thus the phrase utkarṇitai rōmabhiḥ by itself gives rise to the vyañjanā or suggestion that Chandragupta’s mind was replete with joy. Thus, the other phrase bhāva-piśunaiḥ not only is superfluous but mars this implication, causing the Poetic Imperfection called guṇībhūta-vyaṅgya, ‘Implication of secondary type.’ Similarly in line 3, we have bāshpa-guruṇā . . . . chakshushā. Here the expression bāshpaguruṇā is cumbrous and detrimental to the development of the Poetic Excellence, Udāttatā, which has already been animadverted upon. It should have been either bāshp-ālasēna or bāshpa-bharitēna. Again, in the last line we meet with the words nirīkshya which, however, goes with chakshushā in the previous line. In between stand the words yaḥ pitr=ābhihitō. This has caused the Poetic Imperfection called Garbhitatā which is explained by the Sāhityadarpaṇa as vāky-āntarē vāky-āntar-ānupravēśō,⁴ “intrusion of one sentence into another.”

       In this appreciation of Harishēṇa’s praśasti Bühler passes over stanzas 5 to 7. Stanza 7, however, merits some consideration. Here too the author has given us another example of the Artha-guṇa known as Ōjas which we have discussed above. The expression that arrests our attention in this verse is Pushp-āhvayē krīḍatā, ‘(while) amusing himself at (the city) named Pushpa.’ The historical sense conveyed by this stanza has been elsewhere considered at length. Here Samudragupta is represented to have quelled a confederacy that had been formed against him by four princes. Three of them he met in an open battle, and killed them. The fourth prince, who was not allowed to join the other three, he managed to capture by means of his daṇḍa or forces, while he was himself sporting at his capital Pushpapura ((Pāṭaliputra). Here the phrase Pushp-āhvayē kṛīḍatā is ‘pregnant with meaning’ (svābhiprāya) as every example of Ōjas should be. The words Pushp-āhvayē kṛīḍatā ‘sporting in Pushpa’ (flower and also Pāṭaliputra) indicate with what ease he captured the fourth member of the confederacy. The expression Pushpāhvayē kṛīḍatā thus forms a hētu-garbha viśēshaṇa, ‘an adjectival phrase impregnated with a purpose’ which is the same thing as svābhiprāyatva, the characteristic of this Ōjas.

       Stanza 6 also merits some consideration, not so much on account of its Excellence as on account of its one Imperfection. Line 3 of this verse has sphuṭa-bahu-rasa-snēha-phullair, where either sphuṭa or phulla had better be deleted. Otherwise it is susceptible of what is known as Adhika-pada dōsha.

       Stanza 8 has twice received the attention of Bühler. First he turns to it for the expression śaśi-kara-śuchayaḥ kīrttayaḥ sa-pratānāḥ, with which he seems to have been exceedingly fascinated.
__________________________________________________

¹ Sāhityadarpaṇa, (pp. 160-61), Parichchhēda III, kārikā 167.
² Ibid., p. 454.
³ Ibid., (p. 138), Parichchhēda III, kārikā 137.
⁴ Ibid., p. 412.