Query re commentaries on RV 5.53

[Guest guest]

28 December 2008

 

Dear Friends and Colleagues:

 

I have been working for some time on a comparison of the Sumanasantaka of Mpu

Monaguna with cantos V-VIII of the Raghuvamsa (RV), which are known to the

source of Mpu Monaguna’s 13th century recreation of the story of Aja and

Indumati in the form of a kakawin, incorporating Sanskrit meters and tropes, but

composed in the Old Javanese language. Over time I have become convinced that

Mpu Monaguna studied the RV with the aid of a commentary, and very likely in a

traditoinal guru-shisya pedagogical setting.

 

While it may not be possible to prove this point at this stage in the

comparative study of kakawin works modelled on South Asian sources in kavya or

epic form, there is at least one tantalizing clue that might be used to

determine whether Monaguna may have been working with a commentary like that of

Hemadri or Caritravardhana. This point hinges on the way that Monaguna has

reported the meeting of Aja and his entourage with a wild elephant, who in due

course is revealed to be the gandharva Priyamvada (RV 5.42-60, Sum 30.1-32.11).

The most  important point of comparison comes up at the crucial moment when Aja

discharges his arrow at the broad forehead of a charging bull elephant. In so

doing he releases a demigod named Priyamvada from a curse that had caused him to

be trapped in the body of an elephant until being struck by an arrow loosed by

Aja.  Kalidasa’s treatment of the theme is quite terse, giving us the bare

essentials of the curse of Matanga

and its unhappy result for Priyamvada:

 

            RV 5.53

“Because of the curse of the sage Matanga, from an excess of pride,

I took on the form and nature of an elephant,

Know me to be the son of the Priyadarsana, Lord of the Gandharvas,

Known as Priyamvada, one of pleasant speech.”

 

Monaguna’s treatment of this theme in his kakawin SumanasAntaka (composed c.

1204 CE in east Java) is remarkable for the additional light it sheds on the

reasons for the anger of Matanga. In Monaguna’s rendition of the tale

Priyamvada’s offense is to have interrupted the worship of the sage, and to have

done so by bathing upstream from the spot along the river where the sage had

been bathing [Priyamvada > Priyambada, Matanga > Patanga in the kakawin]:

 

“You are right to inquire about my circumstances.

I am well known by the name of Priyambada,

Son of the renowned Citraratha.

He is the eminent ruler of the Gandharwa in the abode of the gods. [sum 31.1]

 

 I came from heaven to roam at leisure.

All alone I wandered about in woodlands

And on to the coast.  There was nowhere I did not roam,

As I sought out every destination that brought enchantment to my heart. [sum

31.2]

 

Here by the Narmada I took my pleasure every day.

On one such occasion I came across the reverend lord Patanga standing there.

He wanted to bathe, and wearing only an undergarment, he went straight into the

river.

Now it so happened that I too entered the river, upstream from where he bathed.

[sum 32.1]

 

He was greatly enraged and, and in menacing tone, he cursed me.

‘Damn you! May you turn into an elephant and so cease to be a celestial being.

Here you must stay close to this river.’

That was all that he said, like a stake driven into my ears. [sum 32.2]

 

The question that arises is whether the additional details that Monaguna added

to his narrative may relate to a commentary on the RV like that of Hemadri or

Caritravardhana, both of which are said to have influenced the SanjIvini of

Mallinatha, which is clearly posterior to the time of Monaguna, and sheds no

additional light on the problem.

 

Unfortunately, as I live and work in Indonesia, I do not have access to the

commentaries of either Hemadri or Caritravardhana, and I understand from

correspondence with several colleagues that they are not easy to track down

elsewhere. If there are any among you who do have access to either of those

commentaries I would greatly appreciate any light you might be able to shed on

the text and commentary for RV 5.53. If the commentary is prolix (as it is

reported to be by Nandargikar) I would be very happy to cover costs of mailing a

few relevant passages from a commentary.

 

[i belive that I have been able to eliminate the Raghupancika of Vallabhadeva as

a commentary accessible to Monaguna by comparing Sum 78.2-3 with RV 6.34 in the

versions of Vallabhadeva and Mallinatha. The Sum at this point reflects the

later reading of Mallinatha, and thus speaks of the halls of the lord of Avanti

as remaining brightly illuminated “even during the waning cycle of the moon” due

to the proximity of Avanti with Mount Mahakala, the above of Shiva.

Vallabhadeva’s reading speaks of the moonbeams falling from the crest-ornament

of Shiva as ensuring the brightness of the halls of the palace of Avanti “even

in the daytime”, without making any mention of the waning cycle of the moon”

(tamisrapaksa in Kalidasa, krsnapaksa in Monaguna.]

 

With many thanks,

 

Thomas M. Hunter

Denpasar, Bali, Indonesia

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

INDOLOGY , Tom Hunter Aryati <tomaryati wrote:

 

28 December 2008

 

Dear Friends and Colleagues:

 

I have been working for some time on a comparison of the Sumanasantaka

of Mpu Monaguna with cantos V-VIII of the Raghuvamsa (RV), which are

known to the source of Mpu Monaguna’s 13th century recreation of the

story of Aja and Indumati in the form of a kakawin, incorporating

Sanskrit meters and tropes, but composed in the Old Javanese language.

Over time I have become convinced that Mpu Monaguna studied the RV

with the aid of a commentary, and very likely in a traditoinal

guru-shisya pedagogical setting.

 

While it may not be possible to prove this point at this stage in the

comparative study of kakawin works modelled on South Asian sources in

kavya or epic form, there is at least one tantalizing clue that might

be used to determine whether Monaguna may have been working with a

commentary like that of Hemadri or Caritravardhana. This point hinges

on the way that Monaguna has reported the meeting of Aja and his

entourage with a wild elephant, who in due course is revealed to be

the gandharva Priyamvada (RV 5.42-60, Sum 30.1-32.11). The most

important point of comparison comes up at the crucial moment when Aja

discharges his arrow at the broad forehead of a charging bull

elephant. In so doing he releases a demigod named Priyamvada from a

curse that had caused him to be trapped in the body of an elephant

until being struck by an arrow loosed by Aja. Kalidasa’s treatment of

the theme is quite terse, giving us the bare essentials of the curse

of Matanga

and its unhappy result for Priyamvada:

 

RV 5.53

“Because of the curse of the sage Matanga, from an excess of pride,

I took on the form and nature of an elephant,

Know me to be the son of the Priyadarsana, Lord of the Gandharvas,

Known as Priyamvada, one of pleasant speech.â€

 

Monaguna’s treatment of this theme in his kakawin SumanasAntaka

(composed c. 1204 CE in east Java) is remarkable for the additional

light it sheds on the reasons for the anger of Matanga. In Monaguna’s

rendition of the tale Priyamvada’s offense is to have interrupted the

worship of the sage, and to have done so by bathing upstream from the

spot along the river where the sage had been bathing [Priyamvada >

Priyambada, Matanga > Patanga in the kakawin]:

 

“You are right to inquire about my circumstances.

I am well known by the name of Priyambada,

Son of the renowned Citraratha.

He is the eminent ruler of the Gandharwa in the abode of the gods.

[sum 31.1]

 

I came from heaven to roam at leisure.

All alone I wandered about in woodlands

And on to the coast. There was nowhere I did not roam,

As I sought out every destination that brought enchantment to my

heart. [sum 31.2]

 

Here by the Narmada I took my pleasure every day.

On one such occasion I came across the reverend lord Patanga standing

there.

He wanted to bathe, and wearing only an undergarment, he went straight

into the river.

Now it so happened that I too entered the river, upstream from where

he bathed. [sum 32.1]

 

He was greatly enraged and, and in menacing tone, he cursed me.

‘Damn you! May you turn into an elephant and so cease to be a

celestial being.

Here you must stay close to this river.’

That was all that he said, like a stake driven into my ears. [sum 32.2]

 

The question that arises is whether the additional details that

Monaguna added to his narrative may relate to a commentary on the RV

like that of Hemadri or Caritravardhana, both of which are said to

have influenced the SanjIvini of Mallinatha, which is clearly

posterior to the time of Monaguna, and sheds no additional light on

the problem.

 

Unfortunately, as I live and work in Indonesia, I do not have access

to the commentaries of either Hemadri or Caritravardhana, and I

understand from correspondence with several colleagues that they are

not easy to track down elsewhere. If there are any among you who do

have access to either of those commentaries I would greatly appreciate

any light you might be able to shed on the text and commentary for RV

5.53. If the commentary is prolix (as it is reported to be by

Nandargikar) I would be very happy to cover costs of mailing a few

relevant passages from a commentary.

 

[i belive that I have been able to eliminate the Raghupancika of

Vallabhadeva as a commentary accessible to Monaguna by comparing Sum

78.2-3 with RV 6.34 in the versions of Vallabhadeva and Mallinatha.

The Sum at this point reflects the later reading of Mallinatha, and

thus speaks of the halls of the lord of Avanti as remaining brightly

illuminated “even during the waning cycle of the moon†due to the

proximity of Avanti with Mount Mahakala, the above of Shiva.

Vallabhadeva’s reading speaks of the moonbeams falling from the

crest-ornament of Shiva as ensuring the brightness of the halls of the

palace of Avanti “even in the daytimeâ€, without making any mention of

the waning cycle of the moon†(tamisrapaksa in Kalidasa, krsnapaksa in

Monaguna.]

 

With many thanks,

 

Thomas M. Hunter

Denpasar, Bali, Indonesia