This is a continuation of the previous post about Raghunatha Shiromani (c. 1477-1547 CE), one of the luminaries of the Nyaya school of thought from what is now Bengal (however, this is somewhat controversial since there are scholars who believe that he was a native of Sylhet (श्रीहट्ट) which, although in present-day Bangladesh, is culturally close to Assam). He received his education under the auspices of the multi-faceted genius Vasudeva Sarvabhauma, वासुदेवसार्वभौम, (c. 1450-1525) of Nabadwip before relocating to Mithila, as described in the previous post. Some say that he decided to change schools because he was dissatisfied with his instruction in Nyaya at Nabadwip; others maintain that he was encouraged by Vasudeva himself because of his eidetic memory to study with Pakshadhara Mishra and bring back the wealth of knowledge that was carefully preserved in the latter's academy at Mithila. The following playful conversation is said to have unfolded between Vasudeva and this former student of his on the latter's triumphant return from his second alma mater.
अपि दिवसमनैषीः पद्मिनीसद्मनिस्थो*
रजनिषु निरतोऽभूः कैरविण्यां रमण्याम्|
कथय कथय भृङ्ग स्वच्छभावेन तावत्
किमधिकसुखमैषीरत्र** वा तत्र वेति||
variants: *अयि दिवसमनैषीः पद्मिनीसद्मनि त्वं;**किमधिकसुखमाप्सीरत्र
रजनिषु निरतोऽभूः कैरविण्यां रमण्याम्|
कथय कथय भृङ्ग स्वच्छभावेन तावत्
किमधिकसुखमैषीरत्र** वा तत्र वेति||
variants: *अयि दिवसमनैषीः पद्मिनीसद्मनि त्वं;**किमधिकसुखमाप्सीरत्र
– वासुदेवसार्वभौम
api divasamanaiSIH padminIsadmanistho
rajaniSu nirato(a)bhUH kairaviNyAM ramaNyAM|
rajaniSu nirato(a)bhUH kairaviNyAM ramaNyAM|
kathaya kathaya bhRGga svacchabhAvena tAvat
kimadhikasukhamaiSIratra vA tatra veti||
kimadhikasukhamaiSIratra vA tatra veti||
– Vasudeva Sarvabhauma
Loose translation: After spending the daytime housed in a cluster of (day-blooming) lotuses, you have enjoyed a beautiful clump of night-lotuses by night. So tell me! O Bumblebee! Tell me, clearly and precisely, whether you found greater pleasure here or there.
Explanation: Although often used as an umbrella term for all lotuses, padma (पद्म) more appropriately covers only those varieties that unfurl their petals at sunrise and close up at night; kairava (कैरव), on the other hand, is a particular white lotus (or perhaps water-lily) that blossoms at moonrise (I have been unable to find out if it is identified with any plant described in present-day botany). Evidently, Vasudeva likens the academies run by himself and Pakshadhara to a day-lotus and night-lotus respectively based on his perception of the former's superiority (the day being considered superior to the night). But, what is not clear to me is why he emphasizes the femininity of the word kairaviNI (कैरविणी), "a clump of night-lotuses", by qualifying it with the term ramaNI (रमणी), "woman" / "beautiful woman" / "wife". Is he trying to demean Pakshadhara (making this an instance of male chauvinism), or is he showing his respect for his rival by acknowledging the "beauty" of the latter's scholarship and pedagogy? Or is it just because the place-name mithilA (मिथिला) has the feminine gender in Sanskrit, while navadvIpa (नवद्वीप) is non-feminine? Whatever the reason, this feminization of Raghunatha's "foreign" education runs as a common thread through the entire conversation.
Sources:
This triad of couplets, with minor variations, is quoted as an exchange between a teacher and his student in two modern anthologies (although the individual verses can be found elsewhere as well): Udbhata Shloka Maalaa (1937), Appendix (परिशिष्टश्लोकाः), Verses 87-89; Udbhata Kavita Kaumudi (उद्भटकविताकौमुदी), compiled by Nilmani Bidyalankar Bhattacharya and published in 1890 in Calcutta, Verses 89-91; the attribution to Vasudeva Sarvabhauma and Raghunatha Shiromani is noted in the former only. The episode is apocryphal.
Explanation: Although often used as an umbrella term for all lotuses, padma (पद्म) more appropriately covers only those varieties that unfurl their petals at sunrise and close up at night; kairava (कैरव), on the other hand, is a particular white lotus (or perhaps water-lily) that blossoms at moonrise (I have been unable to find out if it is identified with any plant described in present-day botany). Evidently, Vasudeva likens the academies run by himself and Pakshadhara to a day-lotus and night-lotus respectively based on his perception of the former's superiority (the day being considered superior to the night). But, what is not clear to me is why he emphasizes the femininity of the word kairaviNI (कैरविणी), "a clump of night-lotuses", by qualifying it with the term ramaNI (रमणी), "woman" / "beautiful woman" / "wife". Is he trying to demean Pakshadhara (making this an instance of male chauvinism), or is he showing his respect for his rival by acknowledging the "beauty" of the latter's scholarship and pedagogy? Or is it just because the place-name mithilA (मिथिला) has the feminine gender in Sanskrit, while navadvIpa (नवद्वीप) is non-feminine? Whatever the reason, this feminization of Raghunatha's "foreign" education runs as a common thread through the entire conversation.
त्वं पीयूष दिवोऽपि भूषणमसि द्राक्षे परीक्षेत को
माधुर्यं तव विश्वतो हि विदिता माध्वीक माध्वीकता|
किन्त्वेकन्त्वपरन्त्वरुन्तुदमपि ब्रूमो न चेत् कुप्यसि
यः कान्ताधरपल्लवे मधुरिमा नान्यत्र कुत्रापि सः||
माधुर्यं तव विश्वतो हि विदिता माध्वीक माध्वीकता|
किन्त्वेकन्त्वपरन्त्वरुन्तुदमपि ब्रूमो न चेत् कुप्यसि
यः कान्ताधरपल्लवे मधुरिमा नान्यत्र कुत्रापि सः||
– रघुनाथशिरोमणि
tvaM pIyUSa divo(a)pi bhUSaNamasi drAkSe parIkSeta ko
mAdhuryaM tava vizvato hi viditA mAdhvIka mAdhvIkatA|
mAdhuryaM tava vizvato hi viditA mAdhvIka mAdhvIkatA|
kintvekantvaparantvaruntudamapi brUmo na cet kupyasi
yaH kAntAdharapallave madhurimA nAnyatra kutrApi saH||
yaH kAntAdharapallave madhurimA nAnyatra kutrApi saH||
– Raghunatha Shiromani
Loose translation: O Nectar! You are verily an ornament of paradise! O (Fruit of the) Grapevine! Who is capable of passing judgment on how sweet you are? O Sweet Wine (see notes)! Your superior taste is universally acknowledged. But, there is this heart-rending truth that I must tell you, and I hope it does not anger you – the sweetness that exists in the tender lips of a beautiful / beloved woman can never be found elsewhere.
Explanation: Quite cleverly, Raghunatha begins by comparing Vasudeva's teaching to three of the most delicious substances in heaven and earth before breaking his heart with one fell sweep of a well-established poetic trope (kavisamaya (कविसमय)) – declaring the lips of one's love interest to be more delectable than even nectar or wine! You might want to check this post out, too.
Notes: mAdhvIka (माध्वीक), or the feminine form mAdhvI (माध्वी), is an alcoholic beverage frequently spoken of in Indic literature. The names madhumAdhvIka (मधुमाध्वीक) and mAdhavaka (माधवक) are also found. This drink is said to be prepared either from madhu (मधु), i.e. honey, or from the flowers of the mahua tree, Madhuca longifolia, called madhuka (मधुक) in Sanskrit (the latter is more likely to be correct, see this). Note that madhu (मधु) is also a generic name for any spirituous liquor.
Utterly deflated by his brilliant student's words, Vasudeva closed the conversation with the following allusive snippet.
Explanation: Quite cleverly, Raghunatha begins by comparing Vasudeva's teaching to three of the most delicious substances in heaven and earth before breaking his heart with one fell sweep of a well-established poetic trope (kavisamaya (कविसमय)) – declaring the lips of one's love interest to be more delectable than even nectar or wine! You might want to check this post out, too.
Notes: mAdhvIka (माध्वीक), or the feminine form mAdhvI (माध्वी), is an alcoholic beverage frequently spoken of in Indic literature. The names madhumAdhvIka (मधुमाध्वीक) and mAdhavaka (माधवक) are also found. This drink is said to be prepared either from madhu (मधु), i.e. honey, or from the flowers of the mahua tree, Madhuca longifolia, called madhuka (मधुक) in Sanskrit (the latter is more likely to be correct, see this). Note that madhu (मधु) is also a generic name for any spirituous liquor.
Utterly deflated by his brilliant student's words, Vasudeva closed the conversation with the following allusive snippet.
यस्या जन्मान्यवंशे वसतिरपि तथा*1 दूरदेशे पुरासीत्
सैषा भूत्वा वधूटी प्रकटितविनया वेश्ममध्यं प्रविश्य|
आजन्मप्राणतुल्यान् गुरुजनजननीसोदरान् बन्धुवर्गान्*2
दूरीकृत्य*3 स्वगेहात् पतिमभिरमते*4 धिग् गृहस्थाश्रमं तम्*5||
Variants: *1 सदा; *2 अन्तरङ्गान्; *3 दूरं कृत्वा *4 पतिमनुरमते *5 गृहस्थाश्रमं नः / गृहस्थाश्रमस्थान्
सैषा भूत्वा वधूटी प्रकटितविनया वेश्ममध्यं प्रविश्य|
आजन्मप्राणतुल्यान् गुरुजनजननीसोदरान् बन्धुवर्गान्*2
दूरीकृत्य*3 स्वगेहात् पतिमभिरमते*4 धिग् गृहस्थाश्रमं तम्*5||
Variants: *1 सदा; *2 अन्तरङ्गान्; *3 दूरं कृत्वा *4 पतिमनुरमते *5 गृहस्थाश्रमं नः / गृहस्थाश्रमस्थान्
– वासुदेवसार्वभौम
yasyA janmAnyavaMze vasatirapi tathA dUradeze purAsIt
saiSA bhUtvA vadhUTI prakaTitavinayA vezmamadhyaM pravizya|
saiSA bhUtvA vadhUTI prakaTitavinayA vezmamadhyaM pravizya|
AjanmaprANatulyAn gurujanajananIsodarAn bandhuvargAn
dUrIkRtya svagehAt patimabhiramate dhig gRhasthAzramaM tam||
dUrIkRtya svagehAt patimabhiramate dhig gRhasthAzramaM tam||
– Vasudeva Sarvabhauma
Loose translation: Born into another family, she spends her early life far away; then she becomes a daughter-in-law and enters (another's) house under the guise of modesty; finally she drives away her husband's elders, his mother, his brothers, and other relatives, who used to be as dear to him as life itself, from their own dwelling, so as to have him all to herself – fie on family life!
Explanation: I believe that the above verse is composed from the perspective of said woman's father-in-law (or any in-law who feels wronged by her) with whom Vasudeva identifies – Raghunatha is the uxorious young man, and the learning (vidyA (विद्या)) he acquired at Mithila the jealous wife who has dispelled everything and everyone else from his mind.
Explanation: I believe that the above verse is composed from the perspective of said woman's father-in-law (or any in-law who feels wronged by her) with whom Vasudeva identifies – Raghunatha is the uxorious young man, and the learning (vidyA (विद्या)) he acquired at Mithila the jealous wife who has dispelled everything and everyone else from his mind.
Sources:
This triad of couplets, with minor variations, is quoted as an exchange between a teacher and his student in two modern anthologies (although the individual verses can be found elsewhere as well): Udbhata Shloka Maalaa (1937), Appendix (परिशिष्टश्लोकाः), Verses 87-89; Udbhata Kavita Kaumudi (उद्भटकविताकौमुदी), compiled by Nilmani Bidyalankar Bhattacharya and published in 1890 in Calcutta, Verses 89-91; the attribution to Vasudeva Sarvabhauma and Raghunatha Shiromani is noted in the former only. The episode is apocryphal.
No comments:
Post a Comment