1. Saduktikarṇāmṛta in Kuntaka’s treatment

In Vakroktijīvita, Kuntaka cites numerous stray verses. There is no certainty about the original sources of some stray verses cited by him. The verses are familiar through some anthologies like Sūktimuktāvalī Subhāṣitāvalī, Saduktikarṇāmṛta and Śārṅgadharapaddhati, which were compiled after Kuntaka. But Kuntaka’s citation of verses found in those anthologies make it clear that those verses were prevalent in his time or even before him. But unfortunately no other source material is available to trace the exact origin of those verses. Thus here it is difficult to trace the emendation made by Kuntaka. Kuntaka’s evaluation of these particular verses is not negligible.

Saduktikarṇāmṛta consists of two thousand three hundred and eighty (2380) verses and is compiled by one Śrīdaradāsa, son of Vaṭudāsa in the 12^th century C.E. It is also known as Sūktikarṇāmṛta which means the Ear-nectar of nice sayings. The verses of this anthology were composed by 446 poets and they are divided in to five sections named as pravāhas. The five pravāhas are again subdivided into numerous sub-sections known as vīcis. Every vīcis consists of five verses too. The five pravāhas are named respectively as amara or deva-pravāha, śṛṅgāra-pravāha, cāṭu-pravāha, āpadeśa-pravāha and uccāvaca-pravāha. It has verses from four hundred and eighty five poets. The compiler of this anthology worked under Lakṣmaṇasena of Bengal. The verses of this anthology are composed by Bengali poets like Dhoī, Jayadeva etc. This anthology consists of large number of vaiṣṇava verses because of the compiler’s vaiṣṇava preference. Kuntaka cites four examples from Saduktikarṇāmṛta and uses some of them in two or three different situations.

One of the examples cited by Kuntaka is later found in Saduktikarṇāmṛta is as follows:-

daṃṣṭrāpiṣṭeṣu sadyaḥ śikhariṣu na kṛtaḥ skandhakaṇḍūvinodaḥ sindhuṣvaṃgāvagāḥ khūrakūharagalattucchatoyeṣu nāptaḥ /
labdāḥ pātālapaṅke na luṭhanaratayaḥ potramātropayukte yenoddhāre dharitryāḥ sa jayati vibhūtāvigniteccho varāhaḥ//^[1]

“Uniquely triumphant is the great boar whose natural impulses had to remain unfulfilled on account of his own greatness, at the time of bringing up the submerged earth out of the ocean. Since mountain peaks came to be pulverized at the very touch of his tusk. He could not enjoy the game of scratching his itching shoulder. Since the ocean’s waterlevel could not go beyond the cavity of his hoofs. He had to forego the pleasures of a hearty batch. Since the mire was so shallow that only the snout could touch it. He had to deny himself the pleasure of a joyous rolling”.^[2]

Kuntaka cites this example to substantiate the importance of ‘arthaḥ’ mentioned in his definition of poetry. In the definition of poetry given by Kuntaka the word ‘arthaḥ’ denotes that the things with its own refreshing beauty should delight the readers. This is really a perfect example in this context. The verse describes the inability of the boar to do his natural impulses. This depiction helps in suggesting the greatness of the boar with great aesthetic beauty. Such refreshing beauty of the meaning of this verse undoubtedly delights the readers.

Yet another verse later found in Saduktikarṇāmṛta is given below:-

etanmandavipakvatindukaphalaśyāmodarāpāṇḍuraprāntam hanta pulindasundarakarasparśakṣamam lakṣyate/
tatpallīpatiputi kuñjarakulam kumbābayābhyartthanā-dīnam tvāmanunāthate kucayugam patrāṃśukairmā pidhāḥ//^[3]

“O daughter of the village chief, please don’t cover up your breast with leaf-clothings. Its bulge looks all white while the nipple is as dark as the black berry ripe in good time. It has become strong enough to bear the clasp of the best youth among hunters. Hence, the herd of elephants is humbly praying to you to save the glory of their temples (by not outgrowing them).”^[4]

As an example of the quality named lāvaṇya of vicitra mārga, Kuntaka quotes this verse. The nature of lāvaṇya of the vicitra mārga is that there must be a harmonious combination of words, absence of the elision of final aspirates and also have short syllables preceding conjunct consonants. This example satisfies all these features because there is no deliberate addition of words and in the second line, the poet has used the short syllables like ‘śa’ and ‘la’ before the conjunct consonant ‘kṣa’. Through the final word ‘pidhāḥ’, the presence of final aspirates is well explicit. Here the poet very beautifully portrays this verse as the words of herds of elephant to the daughter of the village chieftain, asking her not to cover her beautiful breast by the leaves because they may get a chance to escape from the hunter, who would be eager to touch her breast.

Kuntaka cites this verse once again as an example of phonetic figurativeness (varṇavinyāsavakratā). In this variety of phonetic figurativeness Kuntaka uses the repetition of new words in the different lines of verses instead of the repetition of same words in each line for creating extreme charm to a verse.

To illustrate one of the varieties of lexical figurativeness Kuntaka again cites the following verse, which is later found in Saduktikarṇāmṛta.

yāte dvāravatīm tadā madhuripau taddattajhampānatām kālindījalakelivañjulalatāmālambya sotkaṇṭhayā /
tad gītam gurubāṣpagadgadalasattārasvaram rādhayā yenāntarjalacāribhirjalacarairapyutkamutkūjitam//^[5]

“When kṛṣṇa went away to Dvārakā, anxious Rādhā besought the support of the water-reed bent by his shake in the river Yamunā, hallowed by water sports in his company earlier. She sang such mournful strains in a high-pitched voice with tear filled eyes and choking throat that all the aquatic creatures moving in that stream started crying in distress.”^[6]

Kuntaka cites this verse as an example of the fifth variety of lexical figurativeness (padapūrvārdhavakratā) i.e. beauty of concealment of art (samvṛtivakratā). The naming of this vakratā is also proper because here the poet conceals the essence of the verse very brilliantly. Here Kuntaka says that sometimes the poet may feel that a subject will lose its charm by direct expression and thus try to conceal the essence through a pronoun. He would make it clear later through some other clauses. As an example to this, Kuntaka cites this beautiful verse. This verse means that after the departure of Kṛṣṇa to Dvāraka, Rādhā deeply sung that song, leaning on the water reed of the river Yamunā that is hanging down by the constant shaking by Kṛṣṇa. She sung it in such a way that it makes all other creatures of that river also cry.

In the beginning of the third line, the poet uses the words ‘tad gītam’. Here the poet conceals the speciality of the song by using the pronoun ‘tad’ and only in the latter half of the verse the poet makes it clear by saying that the song makes all other creature of that river cry. In this way the poet beautifully depicts the charm of concealment of art and Kuntaka’s effort to find out such perfect example for this particular context is also commendable.

Yet another verse cited by Kuntaka found in this anthology is given below:-

tarantīvāṅgāni skhaladamalalāvaṇyajaladhau pradhimnaḥ prāgalbhyam stanajaghanamunmudrayati ca/
dṛśorlīlārambhāḥ sphuṭamapavadante saralatā-maho sāraṅgākṣyāstaruṇimni gāḍhaḥ paricayaḥ//^[7]

“The limbs appear to swim in the surging sea of youthful charm. Breasts and hips unseal the affluence of development. The coquettish graces of the glances clearly dislodge simplicity. Oh, the maiden’s acquaintance with youth is very close indeed.”^[8]

Kuntaka cites this verse as an example of beauty of action (kriyāvaicitryavakratā). Through this variety of lexical figurativeness, Kuntaka superimposes a nonexistent feature of an object due to similarity. This verse beautifully depicts the beauty of the limbs of a maiden at the time of the advent of her youth. First of all, the poet says that the limbs of the beautiful lady are swimming (tarantī) in the ocean. Here the poet imposes sentient nature like swimming to non-sentient objects like the limbs of a maiden. Then the poet says that her breast and hips unwrap (unmudrayati) the prosperity of progress. Here the poet considers the breast and hips as subject and compare it with the sentient being. Here the poet shows how man opens something at a proper time after keeping it with him for a long time. Likewise the beauty of her breast and hips reveal themselves at the advent of her youth after concealing them in her childhood. The next line of this verse says that her glances refute (apavadante) its simplicity. Some new movements of her eyes suited to her youth indicate that she has lost her innocent glances that she had in her childhood. Here a damsel’s transformation from her childhood to youth is compared through lakṣanā. The three verbs like tarantī, unmudrayatī, apavadante create unexplainable beauty of art in this verse. In this way the three actions have its utmost beauty by the use of metaphorical application.

Kuntaka cites this verse again in two contexts. He cites this verse as an example of a single verse having different types of vakratā. Here the three verbs like tarantī, unmudrayati, apavadante denote three different types of vakratas like kriyāvaicitrya, kārakavaicitrya and kālavaicitrya respectively in a single verse. Thirdly he cites it as an example of one variety of utprekṣā, here Kuntaka attributes some of its own functions to inactive objects by considering it as a subject. The extraordinary power of the poet in depicting the function of non-sentient object makes it appear as doing the functions of sentient subjects to the mind of preceptors.

Footnotes and references:

[1]:

K. Krishnamoorthy, Vakrokti-jīvita of Kuntaka, p.17.

[2]:

ibid,p.304. In this chapter all the translation of verses are taken from K. Krishnamoorthy, Vakrokti-jīvita of Kuntaka.

[3]:

ibid,p.63.

[4]:

ibid,p.349.

[5]:

ibid,p.99.

[6]:

ibid,p.387.

[7]:

ibid,p.111.

[8]:

ibid,p.397.