Malavikagnimitram of Kalidasa - English

Malavikagnimitram of Kalidasa

C. H. Tawney, M.A.

THE

MALAVIKAGNIMITRA. A SANSKRIT PLAY BY KALIDASA.

LITERALLY TRANSLATED INTO ENGLISH PROSE

C.

H.

TAWNEY,

MA.,

PROFBSSOK OF THE ENGLISH LANUUAGK, PKKSIDENCY COLLEGE, CALCUTTA,

CALCUTTA: ,

ipubltsfjers to

SFIHSTIK: ^.irrD co., tfje

Calcutta

1875.

CAtCrTTA ?*I5TID BY TSLACKKS, SPI5I :

&

CO.

EEEATA. Page

iv of Preface, line 19,

Last page of Preface,

Page

folio,

for

"

for

42, line 8 of notes, for 76,

line

3

"

" mick," read mich." " read quarreling," quarrelling."

14, line 3 of notes, 15, line 3,

"

Buddha," read Bauddha." for "x" read "xi."

for "

" irpofjLvyorpia"

of notes, for

read "

nairghrinyam" 77, liae

1

-

"read snairghrinyam" read -'reads

of notes, after " the," dele " a."

PREFACE. for the use of persons following translation is intended The admirable beginning the study of Sanskrit literature.

THE

play by Shankar Pandit, M.A., forming No. VI. of the Bombay Sanskrit Series, will hardly meet the edition of

this

Professor Weber's

needs of the

tiro.

made from a

faulty text

and

;

take up the study of Sanskrit

man.

it

translation

possible that

is

may

German

translation sufficiently

many who

not be familiar with Ger-

There seems therefore to be an opening literal to

was

for

an English in unravel-

assist

beginners The number of text. Sanskrit the of difficulties the ling students who master the rudiments of Sanskrit is increasing

A

every day.

knowledge of the grammar of

this

language

and indispensable to the student of comparative Philology, whatever may be thought of the abstract merits of Sanskrit

is

value for Englishmen who have chosen an Indian career, as throwing a flood of light the social customs and modes of thought of the more literature, it

must always have

its

upon

cultivated classes of

modern Hindu

The Malavikagnimitra ture

of

furnishes

society.

us with

a

vivid

pic-

a native court in the most flourishing period

of

Christ. Indian history, probably about the third century after late Professor Wilson to attempt was indeed made by the show that the play could not have been written before the work of tenth or eleventh century, and was therefore not the

An

His objections, which rest solely upon have been fully refuted by Weber, whose

the great Kalidasa. internal evidence, 1

There

is

1

not the same melody in the verse nor fancy in the thoughts.

Wilson's Hindoo Theatre, Vol.

II., p- 346.

PREFACE.

IV

arguments are reproduced in Sliankar Pandit's edition, and So far from the interfortified with some additional proofs. evidence being against the traditional belief that the play is the work of the great Kalidasa, a great many coinnal

cidences of style and thought between this and the other works attributed to

him

are pointed

out

by the above-mentioned

Indeed, Wilson in his account of the play supplies us with some arguments in favour of its antiquity, though

scholars.

he

finally decides against

cult to understand

it.

how a

I confess critic

it

seems to

me

diffi-

who places Bhavabhuti in

the eighth century can have assigned so late a date to the

With reference to Bhavabhuti, Wilson " The date thus given to the compositions of " Bhavabhuti is quite in accordance with their internal evi" dence. The manners are purely Hindoo, without any foreign te admixture. The appearance of women of rank in public, " and their exemption from any personal restraint in their " own habitations, are very incompatible with the presence " of Mahometan rulers. The licensed existence of Buddha

Malavikagnimitra. observes

tl

'

:

ascetics, their access

" as teachers

" "

"

to

the great,

of science, are

other

and their employment

peculiarities characteristic

of an early date, which the worship of Civa in his terrific

forms, and the prevalence of the practices of the Yoga, are indications of a similar tendency."

Now, it is curious that in the Malavikagnimitra we find a female Buddhist ascetic held in great honour, who speaks Sanskrit, and not Prakrit (the ordinary dialect of women in the Indian plays, even of queens), is apparently acquainted with the theory and practice of medicine, 'and is usually ad" learned" or " reverend/' dressed as It

is

indeed an objection to the historical truth of the play

that Pushpamitra was according to Buddhist accounts a zeal1

lliudoo Theatre, Vol.

II., p. 4.

PREFACE.

But

cms persecutor of Buddhists.

it

does not follow that his

son Agnimitra was hostile to the Buddhists ; indeed, he have quarrelled with his father upon this very ground

may :

(see

the expression vigatarosJiachetasa, p. 107, line 11, of the Bomto our position to supbay edition), besides, it is not necessary '

author possessed accurate information with the kings of the Cunga dynasty, which respect to the history of flourished so long before the date assigned by modern scholars

pose

the

that

to the great Kalidasa.

invoked in the Malavikagnimitra, though we have no trace of the bloody worship of his consort Kali, of which we read in the works of Bhavabhuti, and which is generally

Civa

is

believed to be of comparatively

modern

origin.

As

for the

from the long and involved com"dark conceits" which puzzle the student of

diction of our play, it is free

pounds and

is throughout fresher and more nathat of tural than the style poetl

Bhavabuti's works, and

Those who are not convinced by the arguments of Weber and Shankar Pandit that the play was composed by the author of the Cakuntala will, I think, admit on reading it, that

it

society before the

For

Mahometan

Hindu

this reason it has

historical value,

though

invasion.

an abiding

one would, of course, think of

no

of

furnishes us with a genuine description

comparing

it in this

respect

with the Mrichchhakati, which reveals to us strata of Hindu beneath the notice of the society, that were apparently I now proceed to author of the courtly Malavikagnimitra. Indische Alterof Lassen's extract from the second volume

thumskunde an account

of the

Cunga dynasty

which Pushpamitra was the founder

1

This

is

a conjecture of

my own.

been angry because his son was sent

to

of kings of

:

Shnnkar Pandit supposes he guard the horse.

may have

PREFACE.

VI

" After the death of

"

A$oka the vast dominions

of the

Mauvya kings broke up into three kingdoms. The first was " in Magadha, the kings of which have been already men" tioned. The second was that of Jaloka, which included a "

"

1

He

great part of North- Western India as well as Kacmira.

no doubt identical with the Indian king, called by the " Greeks Sophagasenos, who was a contemporary of Antiois

" elms the great, and renewed with him the treaty which his " forefathers had ade.

.......

m

" The "

third

kingdom of the Mauryas probably embraced a

part of the south-western provinces of the original

kingdom, " as its kings are mentioned as successors of Kunala, who " was Viceroy in Takshacila and Gandhara. " After the death of his father, Sampadi must have de" clared himself and a arose struggle probably

independent,

" between the three " and obtained

brothers, in

which Jaloka was

victorious,

greater part of his father's kingdom. "Suyacas secured the eastern, Sampadi the soulh-western {( He probably transferred the seat of his soveportion.

"

the

reignty to Vidia,

at

any rate

this

city

appears as the

" of the capital succeeding dynasty of Cunga kings. " We possess some information about Pushpamitra the " founder of this dynasty in a Buddhist work, and also in

" the drama Malavikagnimitra. The Purauas only inform us " that he was the general of the last Maurya Brihadratha^ " whom he of his throne and his life. In the Buddeprived

" dhist work we are

" and "

"

first

told that he

statement

is

last of the

Mauryas,

Pushyadharman.

of course a mistake, the second

supposed to be correct, as the

1

was the

that his predecessor was called

name

The

may

could scarcely have been

Said to be derived from Mura, the mother of Chandragupta, the

Maurya

king.

be

first

PREFACE.

" invented.

VII

According to the drama the capital of his son was Vidi^a, so we are perhaps justified in supAgnimitra " posing that he was originally in the service of Pushyadhar-

<

'

{

tl

man, and that

''

king of

after usurping his throne, he

of

Magadha

his

deprived the

The

sovereignty.

fact

that in

" another account, which we shall proceed to lay before our " readers, he is represented as reigning at Pataliputraneednot " surprise us, as in this account he is supposed to belong to the

"

Maurya dynasty. "

" ((

We

are told in the

horse-sacrifice, he

drama

let loose

that, intending to perform the

a horse, which, as

it

was wandering

along the right bank of the Indus, was carried off by a squa-

" dron of Yavana cavalry, but rescued by " sumitra. "

We cannot

its

guard under Va-

of course be certain whether this was the real

" cause of the quarrel or

not,

but so much

is

clear that

Pushpa-

" mitra came into collision with the Greeks on the bank " Indus. As he ascended the throne in 178 B. C. ,this

of the

struggle

" must have taken According place in the reign of Eukratides. " to the account in the drama, it took place under the rule of his " son Agnimitra, whose general he was, but this is contrary (i