Supplement to Lesson # 73

Supplement to Lesson # 73

संस्कृतभाषायाः नूतनाध्ययनस्य त्रिसप्ततितमस्य पाठस्य परिशिष्टम् |

This supplement is to present मल्लिनाथी टीका on the श्लोक studied in Lesson # 73. Let us first have the श्लोक for ready reference –

जातं वंशे भुवनविदिते पुष्करावर्तकानाम् |

जानामि त्वाम् प्रकृतिपुरुषं कामरूपं मघोनः |

तेनार्थित्वं त्वयि विधिवशाद्दूरबन्धुर्गतोऽहम्  |

याञ्चा मोघा वरमधिगुणे नाधमे लब्धकामा ||

मल्लिनाथी टीका is one continuous narration. I am detailing it into 12 paragraphs, which helps me to understand it better and also comes handy to add notes paragraph by paragraph.

१ जातमिति |

Note – जातमिति = जातम् + इति ।

  • (१.१) This is sort of a declaration, मल्लिनाथ’s style to say, “This is about the श्लोक starting with “जातम्”
  • (१.२) इति (= so be it)
  • (१.३) Every मल्लिनाथी टीका starts in this style.

२   हे मेघ, त्वाम् भुवनेषु विदिते भुवनविदिते |

“निष्ठा” (३-२-१०२ पा. सू.) इति भूतार्थे क्तः |

“मतिबुद्धि ___ “ (३-२-१८८ पा. सू.) इत्यादिना वर्तमानार्थत्वे तु

“क्तस्य च वर्तमाने” (२-३-६७ पा. सू.) इति भुवनशब्दस्य षष्ठ्यन्ततानियमात्समासो न स्यात् |

“क्तेन च पूजायाम्” (२-२-१२ पा. सू.) इति निषेधात् |

Note –

  • (२.१) It seems, in times of मल्लिनाथ, it was commonplace to resort to सन्धि and समास at will, regardless of how long a word would be | That is why to understand the टीका also, one has to employ “सन्धि-विच्छेदान् कृत्वा समासानां पदानि च दर्शयित्वा” e.g. –

वर्तमानार्थत्वे = वर्तमान-अर्थत्वे |
षष्ठ्यन्ततानियमात्समासो न = षष्ठी-अन्तता-नियमात् समासः न |

  • (२.२) It seems, by saying “इति निषेधात्” मल्लिनाथ does not approve of कालिदास to have composed a word like “भुवनविदिते” | मल्लिनाथ quotes references of various सूत्राणि of पाणिनी (पा. सू.) to substantiate his disapproval.

३  पुष्करावर्तकानाम् – पुष्कराश्चावर्तकाश्च केचिन्मेघानां श्रेष्ठास्तेषां वंशे जातम् | महाकुलप्रसूतमित्यर्थः |

Note –

  • (३.१) this मल्लिनाथी to be read as –
पुष्कराः च आवर्तकाः च केचित् मेघानां श्रेष्ठाः तेषां वंशे जातम् | महा-कुल-प्रसूतं इति अर्थः |
  • (३.२) The book in which I found मल्लिनाथी of this श्लोक was edited by पण्डित रामचन्द्र दतात्रेय दीक्षित किञ्जवडेकर-शास्त्री. The editor has added his own notes in मराठी, saying –

“whereas मल्लिनाथ seems to regard पुष्कर and आवर्तक as two different eminent clouds, some learned people suggest derivation of पुष्करावर्तकानाम् to mean “पुष्करं जलम् आवर्तयन्ति ‘भ्रामयन्ति’ इति पुष्करावर्तकाः ”

  • (३.३) By this note of the editor, पुष्करावर्तकानाम् would mean those clouds, which migrate and spread water, which has nourishment
  • (३.४) In an additional note the editor mentions –
“as mentioned in ब्रह्माण्डपुराणम् clouds are formed in 3 different ways – (1) from fire (2) from breathing of Brahman and (3) from the wings of mountains slashed by इन्द्र. Clouds of the third type are called as “पुष्करावर्तक” !
  • (३.५) This brings to mind the mention in श्रीमद्भगवद्गीता –
यज्ञात् भवति पर्जन्यो ….. ||३-१४|| …. एवम् प्रवर्तितं चक्रम् …. ||३-१६|| Clouds are an essential and integral part of this cycle and the related यज्ञ ।
  • (३.६) Dr. Avinash Sathaye commented –
The word पुष्कर has many meanings and I would not worry about the meaning in आपटे, which refers to this very verse.
The two words पुष्कर  and आवर्तक seem to be designed to indicate powerful mighty beings among clouds. So, they may cause devastation.
  • (३.७) कालिदास just used the word “पुष्करावर्तकानाम्” and that generates so much of commentary ! What meaning कालिदास himself had in mind becomes a curiosity. But, as poets would be wont to, स्वयमपि लिखितं स्वयम् न वाचयति 🙂
४  कामरूपम् इच्छाधीनविग्रहम् | दुर्गादिसंचारक्षममित्यर्थः |

Here,

  • (४.१) इच्छाधीनविग्रहम् = इच्छा-अधीन-विग्रहम् | मल्लिनाथ seems to suggest that the word “कामरूपम्” is to be deciphered (विग्रह) as “इच्छा-अधीन” meaning “wilful” or
  • (४.२) मल्लिनाथ would translate कामरूपम् to mean “one who has his विग्रह (= countenance) at the command of his will (इच्छाधीन)
  • (४.३) Clouds assume any shape and form, right ? Is there is any rule for what shape and form a cloud should assume where and when ? They are “कामरूप”
  • (४.४) मल्लिनाथ also adds –
दुर्गादिसंचारक्षममित्यर्थः = (यः) दुर्ग-आदि-संचार-क्षमः (तम् ) इति अर्थः |
meaning, “(to him, who is) capable of wading across mountains etc.”

५  मघोनः इन्द्रस्य प्रकृतिपुरुषं प्रधानपुरुषं जानामि |

  • (५.१) मल्लिनाथ first gives simple meaning of मघोनः (= इन्द्रस्य) ।
  • (५.२) He then interprets प्रकृतिपुरुष to mean “प्रधान-पुरुष” i.e. chieftain of इन्द्र. इन्द्र is regarded as the deity commanding the rains. So, a cloud is fittingly the chieftain of इन्द्र !
  • (५.३) Dr. Avinash Sathaye commented –

First of all, you missed the opportunity of explaining the variants of मघवन्
The natural declension of this word would have produced मघवतः and not  मघोनः .
That is why the पाणिनी-सूत्र was formed.
The word मघ does have a meaning of power/wealth and hence it is the name of इन्द्र.

तेन महाकुलप्रसूतत्वादिगुणयोगित्वेन हेतुना विधिवशात् दैवायत्तत्वात् |

“विधिर्विधाने दैवे च –“ (३-३-९९) इत्यमरः |

“वशमायत्ते वशमिच्छाप्रभुत्वयोः ” इति विश्वः |

Here –

  • (६.१) महाकुलप्रसूतत्वादिगुणयोगित्वेन = महा-कुल-प्रसूतत्व-आदि-गुण-योगित्वेन
  • (६.२) मल्लिनाथ gives meaning of विधिवशात् = दैवायत्तत्वात् (दैव-आयत्त-त्व –> तस्मात्) I am wondering what the verbal root is for the past participle “आयत्त”
  • (६.३) वशमिच्छाप्रभुत्वयोः = वशं इच्छा-प्रभुत्व-योः

७  दूरे बन्धुर्यस्य स दूरबन्धुः वियुक्तभार्यः अहं त्वय्यर्थित्वं गतः |

Here

  • (७.१) मल्लिनाथ first gives the समास-विग्रह for the word दूरबन्धुः ।
  • (७.२) मल्लिनाथ then adds his interpretation of दूरबन्धुः as “वियुक्तभार्यः” which itself is a सामासिक-शब्दः “वियुक्तः भार्यायाः” i.e. separated from wife”.
  • (७.३) मल्लिनाथ seems to be alluding to this interpretation since right in the first verse of मेघदूतम्, कालिदास has mentioned “कान्ताविरह”, i.e. separation from wife. So it is clear right from the first verse that in this instance बन्धुः is भार्या only.

८  ननु याचकस्य याञ्चायाम् याच्यगुणोत्कर्षः  कुत्रोपयुज्यत इत्याशङ्क्य – दैवाद्यान्चाभङ्गेऽपि लाघवदोषाभाव एवोपयोग इत्याह – याञ्चेति || तथा हि |

Here

  • (८.१) By employing याञ्चेति (= याञ्चा + इति) at the end of this टीका, मल्लिनाथ seems to have dwelt in this टीका on the word याञ्चा ।
  • (८.२) By  “सन्धि-विच्छेदान् कृत्वा समासानां पदानि च दर्शयित्वा” this would read as –

ननु याचकस्य याञ्चायाम् याच्य-गुण-उत्कर्षः कुत्र उपयुज्यते इति आशङ्क्य – दैवात् याञ्चा-भङ्गे अपि लाघव-दोष-अभावः एव उपयोगः  इति आह – याञ्चा इति ।

  • (८.३) Here मल्लिनाथ has dwelt on the trinity, याचक, याञ्चा, याच्य i.e. (1) one who is praying or requesting, soliciting (2) the prayer or the request itself (3) one to whom the prayer or the request is made
  • (८.४) In saying “ननु याचकस्य याञ्चायाम् याच्य-गुण-उत्कर्षः कुत्र उपयुज्यते इति आशङ्क्य” मल्लिनाथ seems to be deliberating on the doubt about the utility of higher status or quality of the one to whom request is being made.
  • (८.५) His deliberation seems to lead him to conclude दैवात् याञ्चा-भङ्गे अपि लाघव-दोष-अभावः एव उपयोगः i.e. in the event of failure of the request being fulfilled, one does not have the blemish of not having addressed the request to one of appropriately higher status or quality. This itself is some utility !
  • (८.६) This deliberation in (८.४) and (८.५) seems to be a commentary of मल्लिनाथ on the complete phrase याञ्चा मोघा वरम् अधिगुणे in the fourth line of the verse and not just on the word याञ्चा
  • (८.७) Mr. Aravind Kolhatkar comments on the word याञ्चा as follows –

I remember that when our revered guru, the late Dr T G Mainkar, taught us this verse in 1958, he had remarked that याञ्चा is a compromise resorted to by कालिदास so that the word could fit in the meter, the correct word being याचना ।  I think that this is a rare (or only?) occasion where कालिदास cannot think of a word which is appropriate to what he wants to say and which also fits the meter.

  • (८.८) From the above comment, it seems, that this word याञ्चा is self-composed by कालिदास ! Can one do that ? One latitude available to poets is निरन्कुशाः कवयः !!

अधिगुणे अधिकगुणे पुंसि विषये याञ्चा मोघा निष्फलापि वरम् ईषत्प्रियम् | दातुर्गुणाढ़यत्वात्प्रियत्वं याञ्चावैफल्यादीषत्प्रियमिति भावः ||

Here –

  • (९.१) मल्लिनाथ seems to interpret वरम् as ईषत् प्रियम् | Commonly वरम् means preferable. But ईषत् प्रियम् means “somewhat acceptable”
  • (९.२) दातुर्गुणाढ़यत्वात्प्रियत्वम् = दातुः गुण-आढ़यत्वात् प्रियत्वम् meaning प्रियत्वम् (= likeability) is by virtue of गुणाढ़यत्व (= higher status or quality) of दातुः (= of the one who has to grant the request)
  • (९.३) The word गुणाढ़य brings to mind the great story teller, who is famous in Sanskrit literature for his बृहत्कथासरित्सागर ।
  • (९.४) याञ्चावैफल्यादीषत्प्रियमिति = याञ्चा-वैफल्य-आदि-ईषत् प्रियम् इति | मल्लिनाथ seems to have become repetitive, rather obsessed to explain or endorse the phrase याञ्चा मोघा वरम् अधिगुणे |

१०  अधमे निर्गुणे याञ्चा लब्धकामापि सफलापि वरम् | ईषत्प्रियमपि न भवतीत्यर्थः ||

  • (१०.१) Here again मल्लिनाथ alludes to his interpretation of वरम् as ईषत् प्रियम् |
  • (१०.२) So he interprets न वरम् also as –

ईषत्प्रियमपि न भवतीत्यर्थः = ईषत् प्रियम् अपि न भवति इति अर्थः ।

  • (१०.३) Dr. Avinash Sathaye commented –

I would not have translated the last line as advice on where to express your desire.
I would have translated –

It is better to have your request याञ्चा to a worthy person fail, than have it satisfied by a lowly evil person.

I take it to mean, the failure with a worthy person may indicate that the desire itself might be faulty, and on the other side, it might turn out to be a bad desire!

Thus, the comment is on the quality of desire being tested, not the quality of the one who is asking.

  • (१०.४) I wonder whether there is an error. Did Dr. Sathaye intend to write the phrase in the last line “not the quality of the one who is asking”  to read “not the quality of the one to whom one is asking”.
  • Dr. Sathaye has responded to the above doubt, explaining – You wondered about whether I meant what I wrote.
    I did.
    I was referring to the testing taking place when the request is granted or rejected. When the request is made to a good person, it will fail only if it deserves to fail. When you make it to a bad person, it may even succeed for a bad reason!

    Thus, when you ask a good person, you should be happy either way, when you ask a bad person, you should be suspicious either way!

११ “देवाद्वृते वरः श्रेष्ठे त्रिषु क्लीबं मनाक्प्रिये” (३-३-१७२) इत्यमरः | अर्थान्तरन्यासानुप्राणितः प्रेयोऽलङ्कारः |

तदुक्तं दण्डिना – “प्रेयः प्रियतराख्यानम्” (२-२-७५ काव्यादर्शे) इति |

  • (११.१) “सन्धि-विच्छेदान् कृत्वा समासानां पदानि च दर्शयित्वा” this is to be read as –

“देवात् वृते वरः श्रेष्ठे त्रिषु क्लीबं मनाक्-प्रिये” (३-३-१७२) इति अमरः |

अर्थ-अन्तर-न्यास-अनुप्राणितः प्रेयः अलङ्कारः | or अर्थान्तरन्यास-अनुप्राणितः प्रेयः अलङ्कारः |

      • अर्थान्तरन्यास is a type of figure of speech अलङ्कारः
      • प्रेयः अलङ्कारः is also a type of figure of speech
  • (११.२) By citing the quotation from अमरकोष, मल्लिनाथ seems to be concluding the figure of speech to be “प्रेय”-अलङ्कारः with the essence of “अर्थान्तरन्यास-अलङ्कारः |
  • The meaning “with the essence of” is suggested by the word “अनुप्राणितः” |
  • I do not understand how the quotation from अमरकोष endorses that the अलङ्कार (i.e. figure of speech) is प्रेय-अलङ्कार
  • Dr. Sathaye provides a good explanation – The Amara-quote is explaining the word वर. When it means a boon from Gods, it is masc. वरः.When it means “best”, it is in all three genders (त्रिषु) . When it means somewhat pleasant (there is the ईषत् प्रियम् again!), it is neuter (क्लीबे) {Note – मनाक्-प्रियम् = ईषत् प्रियम् }
  • With this explanation from Dr. Sathaye, out of the three sentences –

“देवाद्वृते वरः श्रेष्ठे त्रिषु क्लीबं मनाक्प्रिये” (३-३-१७२) इत्यमरः | अर्थान्तरन्यासानुप्राणितः प्रेयोऽलङ्कारः |तदुक्तं दण्डिना – “प्रेयः प्रियतराख्यानम्” (२-२-७५ काव्यादर्शे) इति |

The first one “देवाद्वृते वरः श्रेष्ठे त्रिषु क्लीबं मनाक्प्रिये” (३-३-१७२) इत्यमरः | details only the word वर. So, it is not a comment about अलङ्कार !

  • (११.३) मल्लिनाथ’s conclusion seems to be endorsed further by the quotation from काव्यादर्श by दण्डी |

१२  एतदाद्ये पादत्रये चतुर्थपादस्थेनार्थान्तरन्यासेनोपजीवितमिति सुव्यक्तमेतत् ।

  • (१२.१) “सन्धि-विच्छेदान् कृत्वा समासानां पदानि च दर्शयित्वा” this is to be read as –

एतद् आद्ये पाद-त्रये चतुर्थ-पादस्थेन अर्थान्तरन्यासेन उपजीवितं इति सुव्यक्तं एतत् ।

This seems to mean, “by the (clear) evidence of अर्थान्तरन्यास-अलङ्कार in the fourth line, it is revived in the first three lines as well.”

  • (१२.२) A figure of speech of the type “अर्थान्तरन्यास-अलङ्कारः” is defined as a figure of speech in which a general principle is adduced to support a particular instance or a particular instance is adduced to support a general proposition. It is an inference from particular to general and vice versa. To explain the definition, in Apte’s dictionary one finds following सुभाषितम् –

गुणवद्वस्तु-संसर्गात्  याति नीचोऽपि गौरवम् |

पुष्पमालानुषङ्गेण  सूत्रम् शिरसि धार्यते ||

It means, “In the company of a thing of higher quality, something of lower quality also gains higher status. The company of flowers in a garland, a thread also goes over head.”

  • (१२.३) In this श्लोक, the यक्ष justifies the instance of his request to the cloud त्वयि अर्थित्वम् by quoting the general principle याञ्चा मोघा वरम् अधिगुणे |

(१३) Study of the meter for every श्लोक has been dispensed by मल्लिनाथ by the mention अत्र काव्ये सर्वत्र मन्दाक्रान्ता-वृत्तम् in his टीका of the first verse itself.

Certainly this study of मल्लिनाथी टीका on the श्लोक becomes a specimen of his in-depth and comprehensive style of study.

शुभमस्तु |

-o-O-o-

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s