{"id":2328,"date":"2013-07-13T01:40:54","date_gmt":"2013-07-13T01:40:54","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/localhost\/?p=2328"},"modified":"2013-07-13T01:40:54","modified_gmt":"2013-07-13T01:40:54","slug":"18-skeleton-notes-on-the-kumarasambhavam-canto-v-vol-05-translations","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/01-works-of-sri-aurobindo\/03-cwsa\/05-translations\/18-skeleton-notes-on-the-kumarasambhavam-canto-v-vol-05-translations","title":{"rendered":"-18_Skeleton Notes on the Kumarasambhavam – Canto V.html"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n\n\n
\n

\n
\nNotes and Fragments<\/font><\/span><\/b><\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n

\n
\nSkeleton Notes on the<\/font><\/span><\/b><\/p>\n

\n
\nKumarasambhavam<\/font><\/span><\/b><\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nCanto V<\/font><\/span><\/b><\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\n\"img\"<\/span><\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n1. Thus by Pinaka’s wielder burning the Mind-born before her eyes baffled of her soul’s desire, the Mountain’s daughter blamed her own beauty in her heart, for loveliness has then only fruit when it gives happiness in the beloved. <\/span><\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\nतथा<\/font> may go either with दहता<\/font> or भग्नमनोरथा<\/font>; ; but it has more point with the latter. <\/span>\n<\/p>\n

\n समक्षं<\/font>. The Avachuri takes singularly
\nजयाविजयाप्रत्यक्षं<\/font>, i.e. before Jaya & Vijaya, her friends. The point would then be that the humiliation of her beauty was rendered still more poignant by occurring before witnesses. In this case, however, the obscurity caused by the omission of the names  would be the grossest of rhetorical faults. समक्षं
\nby itself can mean nothing but “before her (Parvati’s) very eyes” अक्ष्णोः समीपं<\/font>
\nas Mallinatha rightly renders it.<\/span><\/p>\n

\nनिनिन्द<\/font> found fault with, censured as defective.<\/span><\/p>\n

\nहि<\/font>. S [Sukhavabodha-tika<\/i>] takes this as the emphatic
\nहि<\/font> (निश्चितं<\/font>). It is more appropriate and natural to take it in the usual sense of “for”, giving the reason or justification (Mallinatha) for her finding fault with her own beauty.<\/span><\/p>\n

\nप्रियेषु<\/font> loc. of object (विषये<\/font>) “with regard to those loved”<\/span><\/p>\n

\nसौभाग्य<\/font>. The “felicity” of women consists in the love and welfare of those they love. Here only the first element is intended; so here = प्रियवाल्लभ्यं<\/font>, the affection of the beloved.<\/span><\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n

<\/p>\n

Page \u2013 293<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\n
\n<\/span><\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n2. By asceticisms she wished, embracing mind-centred meditation, to make her beauty bear its fruit of love; for how else should these two be won, such love and such a husband? <\/span><\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\nअवन्ध्यरूपतां<\/font> literally the “unsterile-beautyness of herself”. Notice the extraordinary terseness which Kalidasa has imparted to his style by utilising every element of pithiness the Sanscrit language possesses. <\/span>\n<\/p>\n

\nसमाधिम्<\/font>. The bringing (धा<\/font> ) together ( सम्<\/font> ) and centring on (आ<\/font>) a single subject of all the faculties; used technically of the stage of , meditation, in which the mind with all the senses gathered into it is centred on God within itself and insensible to outside impressions. <\/span><\/p>\n

\nतपोभिः<\/font>. To translate this word “penances”, as is frequently done, is altogether improper. The idea of self-imposed or
\npriest-imposed penalty for sin which the English word contains does not enter even in the slightest degree into the idea of तपः<\/font> which implies no more than a fierce and strong effort of all the human powers towards any given end. According to Hindu ideas this could only be done to its best effect by conquering the body for the mind; hence the word finally came to be confined to the sense of ascetic practices having this object. See Introduction for the history & philosophy of this word.1<\/font><\/sup> <\/span><\/p>\n

\nवा<\/font> “or” answering an implied objection. “She had to do this; or (if you say she had not) how else could she succeed?” वा<\/font> in this use comes to mean “for” in its argumentative, not in its causative or explanatory sense.<\/span><\/p>\n

\nअवाप्यते<\/font> the present in its potential sense. <\/span>\n<\/p>\n

\nअन्यथा<\/font> otherwise, i.e. by any less strenuous means. Cf. Manu quoted by Mallinatha<\/span><\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\n<\/span><\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n1 <\/font> This Introduction was not written or has not survived.
\n\u2014 Ed.<\/font><\/i><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

 <\/p>\n

\n

<\/p>\n

Page \u2013 294<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\nतथाविधं प्रेम <\/font>Anticipating the result of the
\nतपः<\/font>. The love of Siva for Uma was so great that he made himself “one body with his beloved”, one half male, the other female. See Introduction for the Haragauri image.<\/span><\/p>\n

\nताद्रशः<\/font>.
\nMallinatha glosses "i.e. Mrityunjaya; death-conquering (an epithet of Siva). For the two things desired of women are that their husbands should love them and that they should not die before them.” This may have been Kalidasa’s drift, but it is surely more natural to take ताद्रश<\/font> of शिव<\/font>‘s qualities & greatness generally; “such a lord as the Almighty Lord of the Universe”,
\nताद्र्शः जगदिशः<\/font> Kv [Kumarasambhava-vritti<\/i><\/span><\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\n<\/span><\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n3. But hearing of her daughter soul-compelled towards the Mountain-Lord towards asceticism endeavouring, said Mena to her embracing her to her bosom, forbidding from that great [vow of an] eremite. <\/span><\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\nC [Charitravardhana<\/i>] gives  this verse as क्षेपक<\/font>; it could certainly be omitted without loss to the sense but not without great loss to the emotional beauty of the passage.<\/span><\/p>\n

\nकृतोध्यमां. उध्यमः <\/font>here in the sense of
\nउध्योगः <\/font>, preparatory action or efforts. Apte takes उध्यमः<\/font> here in the sense of “exertion or perseverance”; the commentary [Kv] of “fixed resolve”, the sense in which Apte takes it in the [fifth] sloka. See under that sloka. The word really means “active steps”, “active efforts”. <\/span>\n<\/p>\n

\n मुनिव्रतात् <\/font> a vow practicable only to a saint.<\/span><\/p>\n

\n
\n<\/span><\/p>\n

\n“Whose mind is not shaken in sorrows, who has banished the craving for delight, who has passed beyond joy & terror & wrath, whose thought is calm & firm, he is called a saint.” <\/span><\/p>\n

\nBhagavadgita 2.56. <\/span><\/p>\n

\n
\n <\/span><\/p>\n

\n

<\/p>\n

Page \u2013 295<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\n
\n\"img\"<\/span><\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\n 4. There are gods desired that dwell in homes; O my child, how alien is austerity from this body of thine; the delicate Sirisha flower may bear the footfall of the bee, but not of  the winged bird. <\/span><\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nमनीषिताः<\/font>
\nformed from मनीषा<\/font>
\ndesire (मन् + इष् + आ<\/font>
\n) by the application of the passive suffix इतः<\/font>
\n= desired अभिष्टाः<\/font>
\n,अभिलषिताः<\/font>
\nI do not understand on what principle of grammar the Avachuri followed by Deshpande takes this form as =
\nमनोऽभिलाषदात्र्यः<\/font>
\n, “desired” taking the sense of "able" or "thought able to fulfil desire". This
\nis but one more instance of the blameable slovenliness of this commentary.
\nAdopting this untenable rendering these commentators further suppose that the
\ngods in the house are to be worshipped by Parvati for the purpose of gaining
\nSiva as her husband. But it is difficult to see how other gods could give her
\nthe Supreme, and in any case मनीषिता<\/font>
\ncan only mean "desired", which renders this version impossible. But desired by
\nwhom? If by Parvati, we must suppose Mena to imagine her daughter aiming simply
\nat making a good match in the celestial world. The sense will then be "Thou
\ndesirest a God in marriage; well, there are gods in our home whom thou canst win
\nby easy adoration, while Siva must be wooed by harsh asceticism in the woods."
\nOr it may signify "desired generally, desired by others", when it will have the
\nforce of desirable. This is supported by the later
\n\"img\"
\n& Siva Purana. I prefer therefore the latter interpretation. <\/span><\/p>\n

\n
\nगृहेषु<\/font>. The plural may here be used in
\nthe sense of a great mansion. The old Aryan house seems to have [been] many-storied, each storey consisting of several flats; and in the palaces of princes and great nobles, it was composed of several wings and even separate piles of building. The female apartments especially formed a piece apart. Cf. the Siva Purana where Mena says<\/span><\/p>\n

\n
\n<\/span><\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n

Page \u2013 296<\/span><\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\n“Wherefore goest thou forth to practise austerities; gods are there in my house and wondrous holinesses, and are there none in thy father’s mansion?” A similar rendering is also favoured by another passage of the same Purana.
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\n<\/span><\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\nIt is perhaps a reminiscence of these lines that induces the Avachuri & Deshpande to render “Worship the gods in the house to gain Siva for husband”; but this is incompatible with.
\nमनीषिताः.<\/font> If the Siva Purana then were Kalidasa’s authority, we should have no choice as to our interpretation, but I have tried to show that the Siva Purana and not Kalidasa was the borrower. It is possible therefore that the former may in borrowing have misinterpreted
\nगृहेषु<\/font> and that the word has a strictly plural sense. “There are gods desired that dwell in homes,” i.e. not like the undesirable & homeless Siva, who must be sought by austerity in wild woods and desolate mountains. The only objection to this rendering which certainly gives the best & most poetic sense, is that the contrast with Siva is implied and not expressed, while immediately following seems to be opposed to household worship. But Mena under the circumstances would not venture openly to dispraise Siva; implied dispraise therefore is what we should naturally expect. Such suppression of the implied contrast, one term expressed & the other left to be gathered is not in itself unpoetic and might be expected in a work written under the strong influence of the elliptical & suggestive style of the Mahabharata.
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\nThe reading गृहेऽपि<\/font> would of course leave no doubt; it confines us to our first rendering.<\/span><\/p>\n

\nक्व…क्व<\/font> Again the characteristic Sanscrit idiom implying
\nमह्दन्तर<\/font> “a far cry”. It is a far cry from your tender body to the harshness of ascetic austerities. Notice again the fine precision,<\/span> the <\/span>
\nnettet\u00e9<\/font><\/span> of Kalidasa’s style; there are no epithets with तपः<\/font> & वपुः<\/font>, these being sufficiently implied in the contrasting क्व…क्व<\/font> and in the simile that follows.<\/span><\/p>\n

\n
\n   <\/span><\/p>\n

\n

<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

Page \u2013 297<\/span><\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\nशिरिषपुष्पं<\/font> Cf. the Parvati-Parinaya परुषस्तपोविशेषस्तव<\/font> पुनरङ्ग<\/font> शिररीषसुकुमारम्<\/font>
\n| व्यवसितमेतत्कठिनं<\/font> पार्वति तद् दुष्करमिति<\/font><\/span> <\/span>
\n<\/font>प्रतिभाति<\/font>, a fine Vyasian couplet. “Harsh is this austerity of thy choosing; thy body again is tender as a Sirisha flower; yet iron firm is thy resolve, O Parvati; a hard thing truly this seemeth.” Who is here the borrower, if loan there has been? <\/span><\/p>\n

\n
\nपेलवं<\/font>.
\nThe other readings कोमलं<\/font>
\n& पेशलं<\/font> are less commendable & not supported by Mallinatha.
\n<\/span><\/p>\n

\n
\nपुनः<\/font> on the other hand, however.
\n<\/span><\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\n<\/span><\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n5. Thus though she urged her, yet could not Mena rein in her daughter’s fixed purpose from action; for who can resist a mind steadfastly resolved on the object of its desire or a downward-moving stream? <\/span><\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nध्रुवेच्छाम्<\/font>. The reading
\nव्रतेच्छाम्<\/font> is weak &
\nश्रुतेच्छाम्<\/font>  absolutely without force. Neither is noticed by Mallinatha. The point of course is the unspeakable fixity of her resolve and not its object.
\n<\/span><\/p>\n

\n
\nनियन्तुमुद्यमात्<\/font>. The delicate etymological assonance is a fine survival of one of Kalidasa’s favourite rhetorical artifices.
\n<\/span><\/p>\n

\n
\nउद्यमात्<\/font>. This word is variously taken in various contexts. S here renders by
\nउत्साह<\/font>, Apte by “fixed resolve” and Deshpande by “undertaking”, whereas Mallinatha consistently renders by
\nउद्योग<\/font>. It is as well therefore to fix its exact meaning. The root
\nयम्<\/font> meaning to put under a strain with
\nउद्<\/font> “up” in an intensive, implies the strain put on the faculties in preparing for or making a great effort. It means therefore “active effort or endeavour” or else “active preparation”. In this latter sense Apte quotes
\nगन्तुमुद्यमो<\/font> = Preparations to go were taken order for. In sloka 3 the dative having the same force as an infinitive leads us to prefer this meaning; “effort towards austerity” has no meaning [in] the context. I think in this sloka, it has as Mallinatha perceived, the same sense; Uma is still in the stage of preparation, & is not yet even ready to ask her father’s consent. Effort or endeavour would therefore be obviously out of place.<\/span><\/p>\n

\n

<\/p>\n

Page \u2013 298<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\nNow these are the only two ascertained senses of उद्यम. 
\n<\/font>The <\/font>sense of
\n उत्साह<\/font> or undertaking cannot be established and is not recognised by Apte. That of “perseverance”, “fixed resolve” given to it by Kv in sloka 3 and by Apte here, seems to me equally without authority; I believe there is no passage in which
\nउद्यमः<\/font> occurs where it cannot be rendered by “effort, labour” or preparation. Here moreover
\nMr.. Apte is obviously wrong, for the sense of “fixed resolve” has already been given by
\nध्रुवेच्छाम्<\/font> and Kalidasa is never tautologous, never expresses the same thing twice over in a line. Perhaps he intends us to take his next quotation, from the Punchatuntra, in this sense
\nउद्यमेन हि<\/font> सिध्यन्ति कार्याणि न मनोरथैः<\/font>
\n| But the opposite to मनोरथाः<\/font> desires is obviously not “perseverance” but “effort”. “It is by active effort and not by mere desires that accomplishment is reached.” For a more detailed discussion of this subject see Excursus.2<\/font><\/sup>
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\nपयश्च निम्नाभिमुखं <\/font>water which has set its face towards descent
\nपयः<\/font> the general is here obviously used for
\nप्रवाह<\/font> the particular. <\/span> <\/p>\n

\nप्रतीपयेत्<\/font>. The commentaries take in the sense of “turn back”, most definitely expressed by S,
\nपश्चात्कश्चालयेत्<\/font>. Mallinatha recognising that
\nप्रतीपयेत्<\/font> primarily means
\nप्रतिकूलयेत्<\/font> oppose, gives that sense & deduces from it
\nप्रतिनिवर्तयेत्<\/font> . Apte also quotes this passage to establish this sense of
\nप्रतीपय<\/font>. This of course is taking
\nप्रतीपय <\/font>=
\nप्रतीपं कृ, प्रतीप <\/font> being “reverse, inverted”, e.g. 2.25
\nअम्भसामोघसंरोधः<\/font>
\nप्रतीपगमनादिव<\/font> (अनुमीयते<\/font>)
\n| But प्रतीप<\/font> also & primarily means adverse, hostile, so
\nप्रतीपयति  <\/font>=
\nप्रतीपः भवति
\n<\/font>be hostile to, oppose. It might possibly be taken in this sense here, without Mallinatha’s deduction of “turn back”; the general nature of the proposition justifying the more general sense. <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\n<\/span><\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n6. Once she, the clear-minded, by the mouth of her personal friend begged of her father not ignorant of her longing that
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\n
\n2 This Excursus was not written or has not survived. \u2014 Ed.<\/i><\/span><\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n

<\/p>\n

Page \u2013 299<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\nshe might dwell in the forests there to practise austerity and meditation until she saw fruit of her desire. <\/span><\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nकदाचिद्<\/font> … मनस्विनी<\/font>
\nonce, at a certain time.
\nकस्मिंश्चित्काले<\/font>
\nगते सति <\/font>says V [Vatsavyasa<\/i>]. It certainly means that; but that is not the precise shade of expression used by Kalidasa.
\nकदाचिद्<\/font>
\nmeans “at a certain time”, and its full force is brought out by
\nमनस्विनी<\/font>. The commentators are all astray in their rendering of this word, even Mallinatha rendering
\nस्थिरचिता<\/font> while Avachuri & C give
\nमानिनी<\/font> & साभिमाना<\/font>
\n, meaning proud, ambitious which is ludicrously wrong.
\nमनस्वी<\/font> can mean nothing but wise, intellectual, a thinker. The wisdom of Parvati lay in her choice of a time, hence Kalidasa’s use of
\nकदाचिद्<\/font> which at first seems awkward & vague, but in relation to
\nमनस्विनी<\/font> takes force & body. The wisdom is farther specified by
\nमनोरथज्ञं<\/font>. The commentators take this as meaning “knowing of her desire to marry Hara”, but this was very old news to Himalaya & there would be no point in recording his knowledge here; V’s explanation “for he who does not know the desire, does not give his consent”, is inexpressibly
\nfeeble. मनोरथ<\/font> means here not her desire for Siva, but her desire  to practise austerity as a means of winning Siva. Parvati wisely waited till the news of this intention had travelled to her father and he had had time to get accustomed to it and think it over. If she had hastily sprung it on him, his tenderness for her might have led him to join Mena in forbidding the step, which would have been fatal to her plans.
\n<\/span><\/p>\n

\n
\nआसन्नसखी<\/font> . The Avachuri absurdly says
\nतटस्थ<\/font> , a mediating friend. Mallinatha is obviously right
\nआप्तसखी<\/font> . A friend who is always near one, i.e. a personal or intimate friend. Cf.
\nआसन्नपरिचारिका<\/font>.
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\nमुख<\/font>. Mallinatha takes =
\nउपाय<\/font> by means of her friend & quotes Vishwa
\nमुखं निःसरणे वक्त्रे प्रारम्भोपाययोरपि<\/font> i.e.
\nमुख<\/font> means “issue”, “face, mouth”, also “beginning” and “means, expedient”. I do not see why we should not take the ordinary sense here.
\n<\/span><\/p>\n

\n
\nतपःसमाधये<\/font>. Mallinatha says
\nतपोनियमार्थम्<\/font>, and the commentators generally follow him. Apte also takes
\nसमाधि<\/font> = penance<\/span><\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n

<\/p>\n

Page \u2013 300<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\n(meaning, of course, austerity), religious obligation (?), devotion . to penance. I fail to see why we should foist this sense on
\nसमाधिः.<\/font> There is none of the passages quoted by Apte in support of it which cannot be as well or better translated by concentration. Here we may take as a dwandwa compound “austerity & concentration” or even better in accordance with sloka 2
\nतपोभिः<\/font> समाधये<\/font> concentration to be gained by austerities. See Excursus.
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\nअयाचत<\/font>
\nonly Atmane having the middle sense “to ask for oneself”. Notice the skilful use of compounds in this verse getting its full value out of this element of the language, without overdoing it like Bhavabhuti & other late writers.
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\n<\/span><\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n7. Then by her graver parent permitted, for pleased was he at a passion so worthy of her, she went to the
\npeacock-haunted peak of the White Mother, famed afterwards among the peoples by her name.
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nअभिनिवेश<\/font>
\nis anything that takes possession of the mind or the nature, “passion”, “engrossing resolve”. The first seems to me more appropriate here.
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\nशिखण्डिमत्<\/font>. V considers this merely an ornamental epithet, expressing the beauty of the hill; but ornamental epithets find little place in the
\nकुमारसंभव<\/font> . Mallinatha explains “not full of wild beasts of prey”, which is forced & difficult to reconcile with
\nविरोधिसत्वोज्झितपूर्वमत्सरं<\/font> in sloka 17. The Avachuri is characteristically inane; it says “Peacocks are without attachment (
\nसङ्ग<\/font> = attachment to worldly objects), the sight of attachment breaks
\nसमाधि”; I have reared peacocks myself and I can assure the reader that they have as much “attachment” as any other creature.
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\nI believe that this is a very beautiful and delicate allusion to the destined fruit of Uma’s journey & consummation of the poem, the birth of the
\nकुमार<\/font>, Skanda being always associated with the peacock. Kalidasa thus skilfully introduces a beautifying epithet without allowing it to be otiose.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

 <\/p>\n

\n

<\/p>\n

Page \u2013 301<\/span><\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\n
\n<\/span><\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n8. In her irremovable resolve she put off the necklace whose restless string had rubbed off the sandal smeared and fastened on the bark tawny red like the young dawn though ever her high-swelling breasts rent its firm compactness. <\/span><\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nविलोलयष्टि<\/font>
\netc. The meaning conveyed is that the movements of the necklace had already rubbed off the sandal paste from her breasts which otherwise she would have had to refuse herself as being a piece of luxury incompatible with
\nतपः<\/font>. Some of the commentators take
\nयष्टि<\/font>
\nas meaning “her slender figure”; “the necklace which owing to the restlessness of her slender body had rubbed off the
\nsandal-paste.” But to take
\nविलोलयष्टि<\/font> =  यष्टिविलोलता<\/font>
\n( चन्चलाङ्ग्तया<\/font>
\nA) is very awkward and in any case it is extremely doubtful whether
\nयष्टिः<\/font> by itself could mean
\nअङ्गयष्टिः<\/font> . I should therefore reject this rendering which as far as significance goes one might perhaps prefer. If we take
\nयष्टि<\/font> in this sense, it is better to adopt the reading
\nअहार्यनिश्चयाविलोलयष्टिः<\/font>, understand not विलोलयष्टिः<\/font>  with J [Jinasamudrasuri<\/i>] for that would be merely an ornamental epithet, but
\nअविलोलयष्टिः<\/font> “She put off her necklace, having rubbed off the
\nsandal-paste, and her slender body forgot its swayings” i.e. the amorous beauty of motion attributed by the Kalidasian poets to beautiful women.
\nप्रविलुप्तचन्दनं<\/font> will be in this rendering an adverbial compound. The reading however has little authority.
\n<\/span><\/p>\n

\n
\nबालारुणब्रभू<\/font> . Mallinatha curiously translates
\nअरुण<\/font> by अर्क<\/font>
\nsun; but अरुण<\/font> means “dawn” and not “sun”; moreover the young sun is not tawny red unless seen through mist.
\n<\/span><\/p>\n

\n
\nपयोधर<\/font> [etc.] lit. “whose compactness is rent by the loftiness of her breasts”. The Avachuri is even more amazingly foolish than usual on this line. It construes
\nअहार्यनिश्चया<\/font>  by
\nआहारं त्यक्त्वा <\/font>“abandoning food”, a rendering which makes one suspect the sanity of the commentator, and
\nपयोधरोत्सेधविशीर्णसंति<\/font> by
\nमेघोदयेन विस्तारितः समवायो यस्य<\/font>, the close composition of which is spread out by the rising of the clouds; perhaps an unequalled instance of perverted scholastic ingenuity, though Mallinatha’s<\/span><\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n

<\/p>\n

Page \u2013 302<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n

\ninterpretation of the Dingnagian stanza in the Meghadut runs & will not bear it close. It is needless to say that
\nउत्सेध<\/font> & विशीर्ण<\/font> the strained meanings put on them and that even if they could, Kalidasa’s fine taste in the choice of words would never have employed such out-of-the-way expressions; he would have said plainly
\nउदय<\/font> and विस्तीर्ण<\/font> . The sense arrived at by these unnecessary violences is the most prosaic, pointless and inept possible.
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\n<\/span><\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n9. Even as her face was sweet with its fair-adorned tresses, so was it even with the ascetic’s tangled crown; not set with lines of bees alone the lotus has splendour but also coated with moss.
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nप्रसिध्धैः<\/font>. [C] strangely takes “famous”. The meaning of course is “dressed & adorned” as opposed to the neglected
\nजटा<\/font>. प्रसिध्धौ ख्यातभूषितौ <\/font>(Amara) ”
\nप्रसिद्ध<\/font> means famous’ or adorned’.”
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\nन शट्पदश्रेणिभिरेव. एव <\/font>= alone, in its limiting sense.
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\nNote the implied comparison, a favourite form in Sanscrit classic poetry.
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\n<\/span><\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n10. The triple-plaited girdle of rough grass she wore \u2014 for her vow she wore it though every moment it caused discomfort, now first tied on reddened the seat of her zone.
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\nकृतरोमविक्रिया<\/font>
\n. The turning of the hair on the body is used by the concrete Sanscrit for the sense of discomfort caused by the contact of anything rough & uncomfortable. The same symptom also denotes in other circumstances great sensuous delight.
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\nव्रताय<\/font>, here व्रतार्थम् with a view to her vow, for the sake of her vow.
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\nअकारि<\/font> the Passive aorist; notice this tendency of later Sanscrit towards passive constructions in past time, prevalent in prose (see the Punchatuntra passim) & breaking its way occasionally <\/span>
\n<\/span><\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n

<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

Page \u2013 303<\/span><\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\ninto poetry. The ripe & mature style of the Kumarasambhava especially shows this tendency to approximate . to prose construction. So also
\nकृतोऽक्षसूत्रप्रणयी तया करः.<\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\n<\/span><\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n11. Her hand ceased from her lip from which the colouring was effaced and the ball all reddened with her breasts’ vermilion and, its fingers wounded with the plucking of kusha grass, she made it a lover of the rosary. <\/span><\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\nनिवर्तितः<\/font> . Deshpande singularly supposes that this may mean formerly, i.e. always kept away from. Such a rendering, if possible, would be wholly out of place & meaningless. The difficulty as regards the first line is avoided by supposing it meant that her lip was naturally too red to need artificial colouring or that her maidens did the colouring for her. This is most jejune and artificial, nor has such a detail the slightest appropriateness in the context. As regards the ball it is explained that her hand was too tender to play with it!! This is not only jejune, it is laughable. Kalidasa could never have perpetrated such an absurd conceit. Even if there were no other objections the absence of a word indicating past time would dispose of the rendering; for
\nनिवर्तितः<\/font>  is the causal of  वृत्<\/font> with  नि<\/font>. Now the simple निवृतः<\/font> means “cessation from प्रवृति<\/font>, i.e. from any habit of mind, practice or course of action; turning away from something it had been turned to”.
\nनिवर्तितः<\/font>  therefore obviously means “caused to cease from, turned from”. It cannot possibly have the sense of “never busied with”; but means “ceasing to be busy with”. Kalidasa is speaking in these stanzas of Uma putting off all her former girlish habits for those appropriate to asceticism; to suppose that he brings in matter foreign to the idea in hand is to suppose that he is not Kalidasa. And to interpret “She never used to colour her lips or play at ball and she now plucked kusha-grass and counted a rosary” introduces such foreign matter, substitutes non-sequence for sequence and ruins the balanced Kalidasian structure of these stanzas. Such commenting falls well under   <\/span><\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n

Page \u2013 304<\/span><\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\nMallinatha’s vigorous censure that the Muse of Kalidasa swoons to death under the weight of bad commentaries.
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\nThe poet’s meaning is plain. Her hand no longer as before was employed in colouring her lip, she had put that away from her; neither did it play with the ball all reddened with the vermilion of her breast; for both the vermilion was banished from her breast and the ball from her hand; it was only used now to pluck kusha grass & count the rosary.
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\nस्तनाङ्गरागाद्<\/font> . Resolve the compound
\n स्तन +  अङ्गरागाद् <\/font>the body-colour of the breast. For the toilette of women in Kalidasa’s time see Appendix.3<\/font><\/sup> <\/span> <\/p>\n

\nअक्षसूत्र<\/font> . String of beads, rosary. The use of the rosary, to this day a Hindu practice with devotees & pious women, is thus more than 2000 years old. The use of the rosary among the Roman Catholics is an unmistakeable sign of Hindu influence, as with the Hindus it has a distinct meaning, with the Christians none. See Excursus. <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\n<\/span><\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n12. She who would be tormented by the flowers shaken from her own hair by her tumbling on some costliest couch, now lay with her fair soft arm for pillow sunk on the bare
\naltar-ground. <\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nपुष्पैरपि<\/font>
\n. Like the lady of the fairytale who was discovered to be a princess and no maidservant when she could not sleep all night for the pain of a single flower which had been surreptitiously introduced into her bed.
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\nबाहुलतोपधायिनी<\/font> . The appropriateness of the creeperlike arm rests in the rounded softness & supple willowy grace of the arm; it is the Indian creeper and not the English be it remembered, that is intended. There is therefore no idea of slenderness.
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\nउपधायिनी<\/font> . This is the verbal adjective (cf.
\nदायिनी<\/font>  ) from  धा<\/font> &
\nउप<\/font> in the sense of “lay upon”, so lie upon.
\nउपधाय वामभुजमशयिषि<\/font>
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\n
\n3 This Appendix was not written or has not survived. \u2014 Ed.<\/i><\/span><\/font><\/span><\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n

<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

Page \u2013 305<\/span><\/font><\/p>\n

\n

\nDk [Dashakumaracharita<\/i>] 111, lay pillowed on her left
\narm.  For the full form cf. Shak. 4 वामहास्तोपहितवदना<\/font>
\n(quoted by Apte)& numerous other instances. <\/span><\/p>\n

\n
\nनिषेदुषी<\/font>
\n. S strangely construes “slept sitting on the bare ground”. It is obvious that she could not at the same time sleep sitting & sleep with her arm as a pillow; if we are to render
\nनिषेदुषी<\/font>  =  उपविष्टा<\/font>
\nwe must take with D following Mallinatha “slept pillowed on her arm and sat on the bare ground”; but this is not justified by the Sanscrit, the word being a participle & not as it then should be a finite tense like
\nअशेत<\/font> with or without
\nच<\/font>. Moreover the idea of sitting is foreign to the contrast between her former bed and her present, & therefore would not be introduced by Kalidasa. We must take
\nनिषद्<\/font> in its primary sense of “sink down”, “recline”; it implies entire recumbence & is opposed to
\nपरिवर्तन<\/font> in the first line. “She who was formerly restless on softest couches, now lay restfully on the hard bare ground.”<\/span><\/p>\n

\n
\nस्थण्डिले<\/font>  …
\nकेवले . केवले <\/font>means without any covering, not merely of grass as some have it, but of either grass or any sheet or coverlet. The
\nस्थण्डिल<\/font> is the
\nवेदिका<\/font>, a level & bare platform of earth used as sacred ground for sacrifice.
\n<\/span><\/p>\n

\n
\nएव<\/font> emphatic. <\/span><\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\n<\/span><\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n13. She while busied in her vow seemed to lay by as a deposit for after resuming her duet (of graces) in a duet (of forms), in the slender creepers her amorous movements & her wantoning glance in the hinds. <\/span><\/p>\n

\n <\/p>\n

\n
\nपुनर्ग्रहितुं<\/font>
\n. Notice the strict supine use which is the proper function of the infinitive in Sanscrit. It has of course the dative force =
\nपुनर्ग्रहणाय<\/font>
\n<\/span> <\/p>\n

\n
\nद्वयेऽपि द्वयं<\/font>. The pair in the pair.
\nअपि<\/font>  is here little more than emphatic.
\n<\/span><\/p>\n

\n
\nनिक्षेप<\/font> . A deposit on trust.<\/span><\/p>\n

\n

 <\/p>\n

\n

<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

Page \u2013 306<\/span><\/font><\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/table>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Notes and Fragments   Skeleton Notes on the Kumarasambhavam   Canto V     1. Thus by Pinaka’s wielder burning the Mind-born before her eyes…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[48],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-2328","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-05-translations","wpcat-48-id"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2328","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2328"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2328\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2328"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2328"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2328"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}