Kalidasa Ramayanam

                    KALIDASA RAMAYANAM

                                   CONTRIBUTION OF KALIDASA TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF VALMIKI RAMAYANAM

Dr. CHANNAPRAGADA LAKSHMINARASIMHA MOORTY

Professor, Department of Sanskrit,

SRI SATYA SAI INSTITUTE OF HIGHER LEARNING,

PRASANTHINILAYAM 515134, INDIA

cln.moorty@gmail.com

CONTENTS

1. The importance of the Raghuvamsa 

2. Sources of the Raghuvamsa 

3. Detailed analysis of Raghuvamsa canto by canto

Analysis I: Canto IX 

Analysis II: Canto X 

Analysis III: Canto XI 

Analysis IV: Canto XII 

Analysis V: Canto XIII 

Analysis VI: Kalidasa’s scheme in composing Canto XIII 

Analysis VII: Cantos XIV and XV 

4. Comparative study of the Raghuvamsa and the Valmiki Ramayana 

5. Date of Kalidasa 37

Appendixes:

I. Three important inscriptions

II. Analysis of the Balakanda and Uttarakanda of Valmiki Ramayana ( Openions of

scholars of Ramayana)

III NOTE ON SOME IMPROVEMENTS MADE BY KALIDASA IN RAGHUVAMSA

REGARDING THE STORY OF RAMAYANA

IV. Comparative statement of verses from Valmiki Ramayana and Raghuvamsa.

V. Kanda division of Raghuvamsa

VI. Important parallels from the Raghuvamsa and the Uttarakanda of

Valmikiramayana

VII. Important parallels from the Raghuvamsa and Balakanda of the Valmiki

Ramayana.

VIII Another Look at Uttarakanda of Valmiki and Cantos XIV and XV of

Raghuvamsa

IX. Encounter of Bhargavarama and Dasaratharama from the Raghuvamsa and the

Balakanda of Valmiki Ramayana.

X. Ramayanas in Indian Literature

Footnotes

Bibliography

A WORD FOR THE READER!

It is around 1986. Prof. K.Krishnamurthy, the great Sanskrit Scholar of Dharwar University, was officiating as the dean and Head of the department of story and Indian Culture at Sri Satya Sai Institute, Prashanthinilayam. Bhagawan Sri Satya Sai Baba, in those days used to interact with the teaching staff of the

Institute on the mornings of every Sunday. During one of those sessions, Prof. Krishnamurthy prayed to Swami( as Baba is well known) to tell about the exact date Sof Kalidasa. Swami nonchantly asked “Which Kalidasa?”. “Swami, Kalidasa of the court of Vikramadiya?”. “Which Vikramaditya?” enquired Swami, mockingly? The topic was diverted to the nature of Time and other philosophical issues. Thus ended

Proffesor’s luck to know easily the exact date of Kalidasa.

The problem of the date of Kalidasa has interested me since my college days. While lecturing on different works of Kalidasa, year after year, my knowledge and interest was strengthened gradually. I was wonderstruck at the scholarship of Prof.Brockington in analysing threadbare the composition of Valmikiramayana. Yet the same time, I was aghast at the reservation of the learned scholar when he relegated Kalidasa to a period later than the Uttarakanda, knowing full well that the Uttarakanda is a very late appendix to Valmikiramayana. I was surprised at the amount of and quality of parallels between Kalidasa and Valmiki. This study took me on the path of analysis of Raghuvamsa, which proved to be startling. The result is in front of the scholars of the Ramayana.

If I could see farther than the previous savants in the studies of Ramayana, it is only because that I have the benefit of sitting on their shoulders and peep in to higher horizons. A mere glance at the matter adduced will tell how much I owe to the great scholars, from whose works I unhesitatingly borrowed much volume for my work. I acknowledge their help with sincere heart and declare that I am not in any way infringing their copyright.

IMPORTANCE OF THE RAGHUVAMSA

In the entire history of Sanskrit literature, Kavikulaguru Kalidasa’s magnum opus epic Raghuvamsa commands a special position. For a long time, it is the earliest available mahakavya. even after the discovery of Buddhacarita, it is still the earliest work according to majority of Indian scholars1. It is the trend -setter2 for the genre of mahakavyas.

Among the dramas of Kalidasa, undoubtedly Malavikagnimitra comes first chronologically. However, regarding his epics, scholars differ sharply. While some3 consider Kumarasambhava as the earlier work and Raghuvamsa as a product of maturity, others4 say that Raghuvamsa shows a novice at work and Kumarasambhava reveals as the master’s composition. However, in ancient India, both poets and critics (alamkarikas)5, in one voice, held Raghuvamsa as the crowning of the literary career of Kalidasa. According to many, it is the last work of Kalidasa, which remained incomplete6 (is it so in reality?) for some reason unknown. Among the epics on the theme of Rama, Raghuvamsa surpasses all. Poets 7 shudder to compete with Raghuvamsa.

SOURCES OF RAGHUVAMSA

No man is an island. A poet is what his predecessors gave him. Kalidasa is no exception to this. Kalidasa himself refers many poets as his source.8 Since Valmiki Ramayana happened to be the Adikavya, universally it is taken as the principal source for all the compositions having Rama episode as the theme. Thus, all most all scholars took the Ramayana as the main source of Raghuvamsa for the portion of story of Rama. Even when Bala and Uttarakandas are accepted as later additions to the Ramayana, scholars did not hesitate to take these two later additions also as the source of Raghuvamsa.9 Raghuvamsa mentions the history of 29 generations10 of the solar race from Dilipa to Agnivarna, whereas Vishnupurana describes 31 successive kings. Vayupurana presents 28 kings while the Ramayana mentions 18 kings as the ancestors of Rama, four from Dilipa to Raghu and 13 from Raghu to Aja. Raghuvamsa has Dilipa, Raghu, Aja and Dasaratha in successive order. The same order is maintained in Pratimanataka of Bhasa. Vayupurana and Vishnupurana have the same order except for Dirghabahu who intervenes Dilipa and Raghu.Regarding the successors of Rama, the Ramayana has only one generation i.e., that of Kusa. However Raghuvamsa, Harivamsa and Bhagavata have 24 generations from Kusa to Agnivarna. Vishnupurana has the same 23 generations with the omission of Devanika. Three successors of Rama, namely, Sankhana, Sudarshana and Agnivarna are really his ancestors according to the Ramayana. In both the works Agnivarna immediately follows Sudarshana. However, in Vishnupurana three successors of Rama viz., Sila, Unnabha and Sankhana are called Dala, Uktha and Sankhanabha respectively. Many puranas carry the Solar dynasty up to Agnivarna11. Bhagavata and Vishnupurana take the dynasty later even to Agnivarna.12 In fact, Bhagavata describes up to 113th king and the last of Solar race, King Sumitra. Thus, there is no dearth for names in the puranas and dynastic lists of various kingdoms. Kalidasa must have selected some here and some there out of countless names for his ‘Raghu Dynasty’. There is no need for him to cook-up names, as though he is short of them.13 Kalidasa has devoted the first three cantos for the history of Dilipa. They describe how the childless Dilipa, on the advice of sage Vasishta, served the divine cow Nandini, the daughter of Kamadhenu and obtained through his devotion and her grace, a son after whom the Solar dynasty acquired a new name, the Raghuvamsa. The third Canto describes the horse sacrifice performed by Dilipa, how Raghu stopped Indra when he whisked away the sacrificial horse and the coronation of Raghu. The Ramayana is silent about these events. The Uttarakanda of Padmapurana14 describes the story of Dilipa serving the divine cow Nandini in a similar manner. Raghuvamsa’s account agrees with the Ramayana’s episode of king Sagara’s horse sacrifice15. King Sagara performs horse sacrifice and Indra steals his horse. Later, his grandson, Anshuman brings back the sacrificial horse of his grand father.Cantos IV to VIII narrate the Digvijaya of Raghu, the episode of Kautsa, the Swayamvara of Indumati, the marriage celebrations of King Aja and Indumati, sudden death

of Indumati and the wailing of Aja. As regards these incidents, no source could be traced in the accounts that have come down to us till now. “ “Kalidasa could hardly have invented these, and they must be lying embedded in accounts that have been not yet brought to light.”16 Kalidasa reaches the story of Ramayana proper in canto IX with the story of Dasaratha. It describes his marriage and how he killed, by mistake, the only son of a blind sage couple. The canto ends with the curse of the sage that Dasaratha should also die from the pangs of separation from his son who was yet to be born. Thus, the curse of a sage ushers in the advent of Vishnu as Rama on the earth. Ayodhyakanda of the Ramayana narrates the tragic end of Dasaratha with a flash back of his retelling the popular episode of Sravanakumara17. There are certain differences between the two accounts. Many scholars18 of in-depth study of the Ramayana felt that the episode of Dasaratha’s curse could be a later addition. Whether this addition is pre or post Raghuvamsa, one has to ponder over. Apart from the Ramayana, there is another work, which narrates such an incident of killing the son of a sage by mistake. Vimala Surin (1st or 3rd century A.D.), in his Paumacariya tells the story

of how Lakshmana, during the period of 14 years of exile in the forest, has accidentally chopped off the head of Sambhuka, the son of Kharadushana and Candranakha (Surpanakha), who was doing penance in the forest. Again one has to examine the priority of Vimala Surin versus Kalidasa. Kalidasa recounts the story of the Ramayana from Balakanda to Uttarakanda in the next six cantos from X to XV. All the scholars19 in one voice echoed that the Ramayana of Valmiki is the foundation for this portion and that Kalidasa closely followed the Ramayana.But one has to minutely examine this issue before accepting the view of the scholars. When Kalidasa composed Raghuvamsa, the story of Rama was so popular and the personality of Rama so endearing to all that all the religions at that time incorporated the hero Rama in their faiths and scriptures. The vast literatures of these religions retold the story of Rama according to their tastes. Apart from the Hindus, who made Rama the incarnation of Vishnu, Buddhists made him a Bodhisatva and Jains worshipped him as one of Baladevas in the cycles of stories of Baladevas and Vasudevas. All these sects utilised the character of Rama to further their religions. Jataka stories of Buddhists included Ramapandita jataka or Dasaratha Jataka. Vimala Surin, a Jain devotee, wrote his magnum opus, Paumacariya, describing Rama as practicing Jaina ideals. The puranas and later additions to the Ramayana raised the ideal Kshatriya Rama to the level of an incarnation of Vishnu. Even Shaivaites in their puranas praised Rama as a great devotee of Shiva. At the same time, folk literature represented by Brihatkatha of Gunadhya also incorporated the story of Rama. Apart from this literature, there must have been quite an amount of court poetry--both Mahakavyas and dramas-- based on the Ramayana. All this material could be at the disposal of Kalidasa when he wrote Raghuvamsa. Thus, the source of Kalidasa for the story of Rama can be as follows: 1. Valmiki Ramayana and its varied versions20; 2. Earliest purana literature represented by Vishnu and Vayupuranas, 3. Ramopakhyana of the Mahabharata; 4. Gunadhya’s Brihatkatha, represented by Kathasaritsagara etc.,

5. Buddhist literature represented by Jataka stories, etc.,  6. Jaina literature represented by Paumacariya, etc., 7. Pre-Kalidasa classical literature represented by Bhasa’s Pratimanataka and Abhishekanataka etc.,

Thus, Valmiki Ramayana is not the sole source for the story of Rama of Raghuvamsa. Kalidasa suggests the same when he spoke of his indebtedness to the ‘ purvasurins’21. Cantos X and XI narrate the incidents described in Balakanda of Valmikiramayana. Canto X recounts the Putrakameshti, the prayer of the gods to Vishunu to destroy Ravana, Vishnu’s assurance to help the gods that he would be born as the son of Dasaratha, the birth of the four princes and their childhood. Canto XI deals with the arrival of Visvamitra at the court of Dasaratha, his taking Rama and Lakshmana to the forest, the martial adventures of the princes, the bending of the bow of Shiva and the marriages of the four princes. It ends with the description of the encounter of Dasarathi Rama with Bhargava Rama. Thus, Kalidasa had devoted two cantos of nearly 180 verses to the events of Balakanda. How much did Kalidasa owe to Valmiki in this portion? All modern Ramayana scholars22 agree that both the Bala and Uttarakandas are later additions to the Ramayana. Scholars generally assign 2nd or 3rd centuries of Christian era to the composition of these kandas. If Kalidasa really belonged to the Gupta’s age, i.e., 5th century, as some of the scholars say, his indebtedness in this portion to Valmiki’s enlarged version is beyond doubt. On the other hand, if he was actually earlier to Christian era as upheld by Indian tradition, then, the interpolated Balakanda and Uttarakanda owe their origin to Kalidasa or some one else. Regarding the other sources of Kalidasa, Ramopakhyana of the Mahabharata, Kathasaritsagara, and the Dasaratha jataka are silent about the childhood of Rama. The earliest puranas like Vishnu and Vayu have no mention of the earlier life of Rama. Padmapurana describes the childhood life of Rama, but the work itself is taken as one influenced by the works of Kalidasa and

Bhavabhuti and other poets23. Therefore, it could not have served him. Bhasa’s both the dramas begin with the incidents of Ayodhyakanda and therefore are of no use to us. There is only one ancient work now available that describes the childhood life of Rama and it is Paumacariya of Vimalasurin, representing the Jaina tradition of the Ramayana. The work24 mentions that it was composed in 530 Vira Era equal to 4th century or 64 A.D. However, scholars25 assign it to 3rd century A.D., either of the dates make it an earlier work to Raghuvamsa if Kalidasa was in fact belonged to the Gupta Era. Thus, it must have a bearing on Raghuvamsa. It describes with some changes the story of Rama from his birth. It has martial adventures of Rama and Lakshmana when they fight against Mlecchas and help King Videha. It has the bending of a powerful bow as a show of one’s might and Rama achieves it and secures Sita in marriage. A complete analysis of the work will be taken up later. Regarding the presently extinct sources, nothing can be said definitely. Having described the childhood of Rama in detail in two cantos, Kalidasa unreasonably hurries through the entire adventures of Rama for which the Lord has come down on earth. He summarises the entire original Ramayana consisting of Ayodhya, Aranya, Kishkindha, Sundara and Yuddhakandas in a single canto XII of meagre 104 verses. Many an important event is dropped and other pivotal incidents are “disposed off in single verses and phrases even” 26. Scholars27 give different reasons for this and exhibit ingenuity. But the real reason should be located somewhere else. This is done later. Even when he made some changes here and there, undoubtedly the so-called ‘original’ Ramayana of Valmiki becomes the primary source for this canto. Other sources have little influence on Kalidasa. Canto XII is an incredible summary in 104 verses of the entire Ramayana up to the purification of Sita. Having done this rare feat, in contrast, Kalidasa devotes Canto XIII wholly to the return journey of Rama and the party to Ayodhaya by the flying car, Pushpaka. Here Kalidasa, through the monologue of Rama, describes the picture-sque landscapes that Rama travelled in search of Sita, but in reverse order. Rama relives the memorable scenes he had passed earlier. Having galloped from Ayodhya to Lanka, Kalidasa, now leisurely and sportingly gets immersed in the description of the nature. Kalidasa makes double the good of this opportunity by soaring high in poesy, for which he is well known all over the world28. Kalidasa’s love for nature, which reflected in his title ‘nisarga kalidasa’, ripens here in to a memorable canto. Probably only after completing this canto, he must have thought of  composing Meghaduta. Sargas 122 to 126 of the Yuddhakanda of the Ramayana also

contain a parallel account of return journey of Rama. It is felt29 that the Yuddhakanda is much worked upon towards its end as time passed. The Ramayana must have borrowed the return journey of Rama from Raghuvamsa. A detailed analysis of the canto XIII will throw new light on this aspect. Paumacariya also has the description of the return journey of Rama but it is devoid of any significance. Kalidasa takes up the story of the later life of Rama in Cantos XIV and XV. Canto XIV begins with the entry of Rama in to Ayodhya and goes through the coronation of Rama, rumour about Sita’s character, abandonment of Sita and ends with the offering of shelter to Sita by Valmiki. Canto XV starts with the sages approaching Rama with a request to kill the demon Lavanasura. It continues with the marching of Satrighna to Madhura, the birth of the

twin sons to Sita, horse sacrifice of Rama and finally ends with the disappearance of Sita and Rama’s ascent to the Heaven. Both cantos go closely parallel to the Uttarakanda of Ramayana. There are no new episodes taken up by Kalidasa. For the first time, we see a striking and much remarkable similarity between Raghuvamsa and Uttarakanda regarding the course of events, the method of narration and even the ideas, expressions and phraseology. If really the Uttarakanda is earlier to Kalidasa, one wonders why did the kavikulaguru, the prince of Indian poets, followed, nay, imitated the Adikavi to that extent only in this Uttarakanda and not in other kandas. Actually, there is no need for these two cantos if indeed Uttarakanda existed at the time of Kalidasa. Literally, these two cantos are carbon copy of Uttarakanda30. Will Kalidasa waste his talent and name in this only to cut a sorry face?31 Having avoided a direct competition32 and comparison with Valmiki in the main story of Rama, will he allow himself to be judged and estimated in the later part, Uttarakanda, which was acclaimed as an appendix? Why should there be so many echoes of Uttarakanda in these two cantos only? One has to ponder over this issue seriously. Regarding the other sources for this portion, we have Kathasaritsagara and Paumacariya and of course, Padmapurana. These works also throw light on the composition of these two cantos. Buddhist Jatakas, Ramopakhyana and Bhasa’s plays do not describe the later life of Rama.Kalidasa, having completed the story of Rama takes up the story of his son Kusa in canto XVI. The canto describes the condition of the deserted and desolate city of Ayodhya. Kusa who was ruling Kosala from the city Kushavati, shifts his capital to Ayodhya after the request of the presiding deity of Ayodhya and causes it to prosper once again. It also describes the marriage of Kusa with Kumudvati, the sister of Naga prince, Kumuda. The source for this and the next three cantos could not yet be traced. Intelligent Hemadri, in the beginning of his commentary on Canto XVI remarks that, the poet’s main source for the history of the dynasty, i.e., the Ramayana, having been exhausted, Kalidasa is composing four more cantos from other sources, which the commentator, however, could not mention33.

Though we are unable to trace the source for this canto, we can see that the motif of losing a jewel / ornament in a river and marrying the Naga princess is very common in literature, especially in folk literature34. Canto XVII is allotted to the description of Rajaniti, statecraft, which is an important element of 18 items of the descriptions, the must for any Mahakavya. The canto narrates how Atithi, the son of Kusa, studiously practiced the Hindu polity as expounded by Brihaspati, Kautilya etc., There being no incident in this portion, it is purely the creation of Kalidasa.Probably the original Raghuvamsa must have ended with the above canto35. But all the Mss., of Raghuvamsa contain two more cantos and all the commentators from different provinces and periods believed in the authenticity of the last two cantos and wrote commentaries for them also. Prof. Hillebrandt36 considers the last two cantos XVIII and XIX as spurious and later additions37. They are the shortest of the lot, with verses 53 and 57 respectively. No other canto has verses less than 70. Canto XVIII is the driest and tasteless of the entire work38. It is just a catalogue of mere names without any stuff. Many a name is played upon in a crude and artificial manner. There is no event, idea or expression to remember. It ends with the coronation of mere baby boy-six year-old Sudarshana. There

being no action in the canto, the question of source for this canto does not arise at all. The names of the rulers, as already mentioned earlier, are scattered through out the puranic literature and dynastic lists. The poet who added this canto might have selected some of these. We cannot expect Kalidasa, who artistically summarised five kandas into one canto, to stuff his magnum opus with this senseless and tasteless catalogue as though he was short of volume. We have seen how canto XII is an example of his brevity. Raghuvamsa, as available at present39, ends abruptly with canto XIX, which describes the frivolous and amorous life of Agnivarna and his premature death. The work ends with the coronation of his pregnant widow as the regent for the unborn future hope of the mighty Rughuvama. Many Scholars feel that death of Kalidasa has put an end to the great Mahakavya. All explanations take it granted that the great Kalidasa himself had composed

this canto also. But dispassionate analysis of this canto tells that Kalidasa could not have composed this canto at any rate. Some third-rate poet40 who had no understanding of the soul and aim of Raghuvamsa must have composed this canto. In describing the sensuous and carefree life of Agnivarna, a descendent of Raghuvamsa, the poetaster goes directly against the aim41 of Kalidasa, who had great estimation of the kings of Raghuvamsa. It seems, as though, by composing this canto the third rate poet undid whatever Kalidasa had highlighted earlier42. Definitely, Kalidasa could not have written this canto. The source for this canto is yet to be traced43. Thus, we have perused all the available sources for the subject matter presented in Raghuvamsa.

* * * * *

DETAILED ANALYSIS OF RAGHUVAMSA

CANTO BY CANTO

ANALYSIS I: CANTO IX

Kalidasa begins the story of Rama in this canto by narrating the curse of Dasaratha, the curse, which ushers in the advent of Vishnu on the earth as Rama. The episode of killing the hermit’s son is popularly known as the episode of Sravanakumara, though both the Ramayana and Raghuvamsa maintain silence in naming the boy killed. The Ramayana mentions this incident in Ayodhyakanda at the penultimate stage of the death of Dasaratha. Dasaratha realises that his sorrow arsing from the separation from his son is unbearable and that he is nearing his end, overwhelmed by the grief. At that time, when the night had advanced very much, signifying the end of Dasaratha, he suddenly remembers how a sage cursed him during his adulthood. As a flashback, he relives the incident and narrates it to Kausalya. Once the narration is complete, he gives up his ghost. Kalidasa has narrated this incident in eleven verses in chronological set-up and made it the source from which the entire saga of Rama issues out. For a poet of first class, Kalidasa, the curse is the seed from which the gigantic tree of the Ramayana grows up. Both the Ramayana and Raghuvamsa concur many a time regarding the major details of the story. But it is in minor details that Kalidasa infuses naturality, drama and grief in to the incident.The narration in the Ramayana is most unnatural, bad in poetry and fails to highlight the

pathos.The Ramayana mentions the incident as occurring when Dasaratha was unmarried, was only a crown prince, näù´ªÉxÉÚføÉ i´É¨É¦É´ÉÉä ªÉÖ´É®úÉVÉÉä ¦É´ÉɨªÉ½þ¨ÉÂ, while Kalidasa tells it as taking place when Dasaratha was married to all the three queens and was well advanced in age and when he had spent many years eagerly waiting for the delight of seeing the face of a son ¶ÉÉ{ÉÉä%Ê{É +où¢öiÉxɪÉÉxÉxÉ{És¶ÉÉä¦Éä ¨É滃 ºÉÉxÉÖOɽþ&* He was so much pinning for the birth of a son that

the curse did not shatter him a bit, but on the other hand, he was overjoyed to receive the curse as a boon capable of bestowing a son. In the Ramayana, no one except Dasaratha knew about the curse. According to Kalidasa every one –all the queens, soldiers and through them the citizens-knew it. Bhasa in Pratiminataka says that the curse is a secret one known only to Kaikeyi and elders like Vasishta and Vamadeva. The incident in the Ramayana took place on the bank of Sarayu River. While in Raghuvamsa, it occurred on the bank of river Tamasa. In the Ramayana, the hermit boy is said to be non-dwija, the son of a vaisya through a sudra woman. Kalidasa merely says that he was other than dwija. According to the Ramayana, the hermit boy, though fatally wounded, wails, accuses and grieves at great length. Raghuvamsa completely omits the

wailing. According to the Ramayana, the boy asks Dasaratha to remove the arrow and Dasaratha extracts the arrow accordingly from the body of the boy. Immediately the boy dies.Leaving behind the dead boy, Dasaratha goes to the blind sage couple. But Kalidasa makes Dasaratha carry the wounded boy with the arrow un-extracted to his parents. The aged blind couples ask Dasaratha to remove the arrow and when the arrow is removed, the boy dies in the very presence of his parents. This change highlights the pathos in the hearts of blind couple, Dasaratha and the readers as well. When the last rites were performed, in the Ramayana the boy attains divine body and goes to the heaven in an aeroplane. Kalidasa omits this reference. The main curse is same in both the works. In Raghuvamsa, Dasaratha arranges for the funeral pyre for the couple as per their wish and they commit self-immolation.The Ramayana is silent regarding the end of the aged parents, though one can understand it. Canto IX ends with the return of Dasaratha to Ayodhya bearing in his heart the very cause of his own destruction.

* * * * * *

ANALYSIS II: CANTO X

Kalidasa takes up the story of Ramayana proper in this canto. King Dasaratha has

become very old. Thousands of years have elapsed after he was cursed by the blind sage

couple -¶É®únùɨɪÉÖiÉÆ ªÉªÉÉè-. He has reached almost the very end of his life nù¶ÉÉxiɨÉÖ{ÉäʪɴÉÉxÉ Yet the

hope of begetting a son has eluded him. At last, sages Rsyasringa and others begin

putrakameshti, a sacrifice capable of securing the birth of a son. Here Kalidasa deviates from

the Ramayana. In the Ramayana, actually two sacrifices- ashwamedha followed by

putrakameshthi were performed by Vasishta and other sages. As a matter of fact, in the

Ramayana, Dasasratha had decided to perform only ashwamedha. Sages under the

leadership of Vasishtha have conducted the horse sacrifice. There is a detailed description of

the performance of the horse sacrifice. It was brought to successful completion also. But

suddenly the episode of Rshyasringa conducting putreshthi is thrust on the ashwamedha.

When Rshyasringa performed putreshthi, all the gods attended it.

According to Raghuvamsa, when the sacrifice is being conducted, the gods go

directly to the Lord Vishnu and pray to him to relieve their suffering from Ravana. There is a

detailed description and eulogy of Vishnu in 10 and 15 verses respectively. Lord Vishnu

takes upon himself the responsibility of destroying Ravana and assures the gods. He decides

to take birth as the son of king Dasaratha. But in the Ramayana, the gods in the first

instance, request Brahma to alleviate their misery from Ravana. Brahma expresses his

inability to help them. At that very time Lord Vishnu appears before the gods. Then the gods

appoint Vishnu to kill Ravana. i´ÉÉÆ ÊxɪÉÉäIªÉɨɽäþ ʴɹhÉÉä ™ôÉäEòÉxÉÉÆ Ê½þiÉEòɨªÉªÉÉ. They instruct him to

Comment [C1]:

take the birth as the son of Dasaratha. Accordingly, Vishnu agrees to the request of the gods

and prepares to come down as the son of Dasaratha.

At the end of the sacrifice, a divine being appears and hands over a divine food

capable of securing progeny. Dasaratha receives it and distributes the same among his three

wives. Here again Kalidasa differs from the Ramayana. In Ramayana, Dasaratha gives half

of the divine food to Kausalya, one eighth to Kaikeyi and two instalments of one fourth and

one-eighth shares to Sumitra. While in Raghuvamsa, Dasaratha distributes the entire divine

food between Kausalya and Kaikeyi only. Both the queens in turn share their portions with

Sumitra. In course of time all the queens got conceived. Kalidasa, in seven verses describes

the queens in pregnancy. The queens see auspicious symbols in their dreams. Both the

Ramayana and Raghuvamsa describe in strikingly similar manner, the birth of the four princes

and their child hood. Canto X ends with the suggestion that the four princes, having attained

adulthood are ready to be betrothed.

Thus Kalidasa has condensed (in fact expanded!) the subject matter of sargas 14 to

17 of the Balakanda in to this canto. The narration is similar to that of the Ramayana. It

appears as though Kalidasa, the kavikulaguruh has walked in the footsteps of Valmiki, the

Kavi closely in narrating this subject. He is going to summarise five authentic kandas from

Ayodhya to Yuddhakandas in to a single canto (Canto XII), but now, he has, in one canto of

86 verses, dealt with the incidents of just four sargas of Balakanda of the Ramayana.

Surprisingly, he has not given any new information regarding the birth and childhood of Rama

and other princes than the scanty material available in the Ramayana. He has no horoscope

for Rama and his brothers, thus vetoing against the horoscope44, which was generally taken

as an addition made by the Southern recessions of the Ramayana. It is strange that both the

Ramayana and Raghuvamsa have nothing concrete to tell about Rama’s childhood.

Incidentally the childhood of Rama spanning to 15 to 16 years is dealt with in 12 and 21

verses respectively in the Ramayana and Raghuvamsa. Even in this small portion, there are

striking parallelisms between the two works. The rest of the canto of Raghuvamsa is filled

with purely the creativity of Kalidasa. The dreams seen by the queens in pregnancy have

parallels in Jain adaptations of the Ramayana.

* * * * * * *

ANALYSIS III: CANTO XI

This canto begins with the arrival of Visvamitra at the court of Dasaratha and his

request for the help of Rama. The canto closes with the humiliation and the departure of

Parasurama. The narration closely follows that of the Ramayana. Kalidasa introduces no

new incident. In a canto of 93 verses, Kalidasa devotes 31 for the portion up to destruction of

Tataka and Subahu and for the protection of the sacrifice, 24 for the marriage of Rama and

Sita and 34 for the episode of Parasurama.

When Visvamitra asks for the help of Rama, unlike in the Ramayana, Dasaratha here readily

sends Rama and Lakshmana with Visvamitra, though they are mere boys. After receiving the

blessings of their father and mother, Rama and Lakshmana follow the sage. On the way,

Visvamitra initiates them into the sacred spells of Bala and Ataibala- the spells, which free

them from the urges of hunger and thirst. They pass by the hermitage of Madana. Then they

meet Tataka. Rama destroys her without hesitation-- ´ÉêÊxÉiÉÉ ´ÉvÉä PÉÞhÉÉÆ {ÉÊjÉhÉÉ ºÉ½þ ¨ÉÖ¨ÉÉäSÉ ®úÉPÉ´É&

- at the command of the sage. Pleased with Rama’s exploits, Visvamitra teaches Rama a

missile controlled by incantation. Then the party reaches the penance grove of Visvamitra.

Visvamitra begins the sacrifice and the princes stand guard and kill Subahu and toss off

Maricha. After completing the sacrifice, Visvamitra takes the princes to Mithila, where King

Janaka was performing a sacrifice. While going to Mithila, Rama liberates Ahalya from the

curse of her husband Gautama. While in the Ramayana, Ahalya was cursed to become

invisible and live on air without food lying in dust, in Raghuvamsa, she was cursed to become

stone. In the earlier work she regains her form and gives hospitality to Rama when he comes

to the hermitage. In the later work, Kalidasa says that she regained her beautiful form by the

favour of the dust of feet of Rama, the dust capable of destroying sin, ÊEòα¤É¹ÉÎSUônùÉÆ

®úɨÉ{ÉÉnù®úVɺÉɨÉxÉÖOɽþ& .

On reaching Mithila, Vishvamitra, accompanied by Rama and Lakshmana, takes part

in the sacrifice of Janaka. On the completion of the sacrifice, Rama asks to see the mighty

bow of Shiva. On being allowed, he lifts the bow and strings it effortlessly whereupon it

breaks into two. According to the Ramayana, Rama breaks the bow in the presence of the

assemblage of kings and courtiers while in Raghuvamsa, he does it not in the assembly of

kings. In Raghuvamsa, Sita is described as ‘ayonija’ but not so in the Ramayana. Afterwards

Janaka gives away Sita in marriage to Rama in the presence of Visvamitra. When Dasaratha

and others come from Ayodhya, the marriage celebrations take place in royal fashion.

Kalidasa names the bride of Lakshmana but is silent about those of Bharata and Shatrighna.

The Ramayana names all the brides. After the marriage celebrations are over according to

the Ramayana, Visvamitra goes away immediately to the Himalayas as suddenly as he came

earlier. Raghuvamsa is silent about Visvamitra as though he is forgotten totally.

Accompanied by the newly wedded sons and their brides, Dasaratha starts on return journey

to Ayodhya. On their way the party meets Bharagavarama.

The encounter of Bhargava Rama with Dasaratha Rama, the encounter of two

consecutive incarnations of Vishnu with each other- is a special one in the Ramayana. It is

commonly seen or described by the poets that the rival kings who attend the swayamvara of a

princess, attack the bridegroom chosen. Instead of the rival kings, in the Ramayana, it is the

destroyer of kings, Parasurama who opposes Rama. It is kshatriya virya in the garb of

brahmana body that opposes the Brahma virya in the royal form. The Ramayana describes

the encounter at a greater length in three cantos in about 60 verses. Kalidasa also narrates

this incident in detail in 35 verses. It is interesting to find Kalidasa as though towing the line of

the Ramayana to such extent that one suspects the very authenticity of this passage in the

context of the Ramayana. Kalidasa’s narration of this incident appears like a carbon copy of

the Ramayana in word phrase and sense. There is only one difference in the description.

While the Ramayana’s Bhargava is cool, courteous and, as a matter of fact smiling to Rama

who is full of anger and asserts his real strength, in Kalidasa these characters interchange.

Parasurama is hot tempered and is boastful of his prowess and provocative where as Rama

is full of humility, considerate and cool. The encounter progresses and ends similarly in both

the works. The canto XI comes to an end with the departure of Bhargavarama wishing

Dasaratharama all success in his future adventures.

* * * * * *

ANALYSIS IV: CANTO XII

Canto XII describes the story of Rama starting from the beginning of Ayodhyakanda

up to the end of Yuddhakanda. Thus, this canto has the great sweep of embracing the entire

action of the main Ramayana-the original Ramayana. Kalidasa has unbelievingly, yet skilfully

summarized the action of the Ayodhya, Aranya, Kishkindha, Sundara and Yuddhakandas in a

single canto of 104 verses. The split up of the stretch of the story of the various kandas is as

follows:

Ayodhyakanda verses from 1 to 24 = 24

Aranyakanda 25 to 56 = 32

Kishkindhakanda 57 to 59 = 3

Sundarakanda 60 to 65 = 6

Yuddhakanda 66 to104 = 39

Total 104

Ayodhyakanda begins with the decision of Dasaratha to coronate Rama and ends

with Rama’s leaving Chitrakuta for Janasthana. Between these Kalidasa incorporates all the

main incidents of the kanda i.e., how Kaikeyi spoilt the coronation preparations, Rama’s

departure to the forest, the death of Dasaratha, the arrival and dejection of Bharata, Bharata’s

going to the forest and meeting his brothers, his requesting Rama to accept the kingdom, the

return of Bharata with the sandals of Rama and their installation as the representative of

Rama on the throne at Nandigrama. Thus no event of importance is omitted. Not only that;

on the other hand, Kalidasa has narrated here the crow episode which is referred to in

17

Sundarakanda as flash back, as though it is an in-dispensable and striking event. The

inclusion of this extraneous episode in Raghuvamsa suggests that it is an original contribution

of Kalidasa to Ramayana.

In course of summarizing the Ayodhyakanda, Kalidasa has not mentioned the roles

played by Manthara and Guha, though he mentions Guha in canto XIII. He refers to the curse

of Dasaratha. As discussed in an earlier chapter, in all probability, Ayodhyakanda of

Ramayana must have introduced the curse of Dasaratha at a later date, being influenced by

Kalidasa. Regarding this Ayodhyakanda portion, there are many instances of parallels

between Raghuvamsa and Pratimanataka.

Kalidasa takes up the subject matter of Aranyakanda in verse 25 when Rama starts

on southward journey to Janasthana and onwards. It ends with Rama reaching Kishkindha in

verse 57. He mentions Anasuya’s gift to Sita and killing of Viradha. He narrates the episode

of Surpanakha in a striking way in 10 verses. Unlike in the Ramayana, here Surpanakha

appears before Rama as beautiful woman. She is more enraged by the loud laughter of Sita

rather than the refusal of Rama. Regaining her natural form, she threatens Sita of dire

consequences of her immodest laughter. Then follows her disfiguring which leads to the

attack of the demons, their destruction along with Dushana, Khara and Trishiras. Ravana

takes away Sita using the illusion of golden deer (Marica is not mentioned) and in the process

overcomes the obstruction of Jatayus. In search of Sita, Rama and Lakshmana meet Jatayus

first and Kabandha afterwards. On the advice of Kabandha, they go to Kishkindha. In this

portion, Kalidasa sticks to the outlines of the Ramayana without entering into details. Yet

Kalidasa makes critical changes in the episode of Surpanakha with profound significance. He

transforms the ugly and fat Surpanakha into a bewitching beautiful and slim maiden, thereby

highlighting upon Rama’s remaining un-tempted. He also suggests that when a woman’s love

is rejected, she becomes enraged and stoops to destroy the very man she loves. This

incident also proves that woman is the natural cause for the misery and affliction of another

woman. Kalidasa makes this incident another example for the ruin that befalls due to

misplaced laughter. Paumacariya and Bhattikavya also present Surpanakha as a beautiful

damsel.

The subject of two kandas of Kishkindha and Sundara are mentioned in the most

condensed manner in just 9 verses from 57 to 65. The making of friendship with Sugriva, the

killing of Vali, the dispatch of the monkeys in search of Sita, Hanuman’s crossing the ocean

on the information of Sampati, the meeting with Sita and handing over the signet ring of

Rama, consoling of Sita, the killing of Aksha and the burning of Lanka and the return of

Hanuman with Sita’s crest jewel are mentioned in quick succession without any significance

as though Kalidasa is in a hurry to meet Ravana in the battle-field. Even through this

compression, Kalidasa charges the nine verses with 4 upamas and 2 utprekshas. The brevity

of this portion shows that, it seems, at the time of Kalidasa’s composing Raghuvamsa,

18

Kishkindha and Sundarakands might not have attained the separate identity as we have

today, their subject matter being a part of Aranyakanda and Yuddhakanda or Lankakanda.

The portion of Yuddhakanda in Raghuvamsa is comparatively an extensive one, in 40

verses, starting from verse 65 to 104. It starts with Rama’s march to Lanka and ends with

Sita’s fire ordeal and the party’s return journey. It narrates the arrival and seeking shelter by

Vibhishana, building the bridge and crossing over the ocean and the commencement of the

battle royal. It mentions how Trijata consoled Sita when she swooned on seeing the illusory

chopped head of Rama. While in Ramayana, this event occurs before the commencement of

the battle, in Raghuvamsa it takes place after the war begins. Kalidasa makes another

change also. According to the Ramayana, it was Sarama and not Trijata who consoles Sita.

On the other-hand, Trijata consoles Sita who is taken in the Pushpakavimana, when Sita sees

Rama and Lakshmana lying unconscious due to Nagabandha. Kalidasa next mentions how

both Rama and Lakshmana were made unconscious and immobile by the Naga missile of

Meghanada and how Garuda released them. This is followed by the event in which Ravana

attacks Lakshmana with Sakti missile and Lakshmana falls down senseless. Hanuman

revives him by bringing Sanjivani herb (not the mountain). Here also Raghuvamsa departs

from the Ramayana. In Ramayana, this event happens after the death of both Kumbhakarna

and Meghanada but in Raghuvamsa, it precedes their killing. Then follow the destruction of

Meghanada and Kumbhakarna. According to the Ramayana the order is the other way i.e.,

Kumbhakarna is killed followed by the killing of Indrajit. Now is taken up the battle in

comparable, the one between Rama and Ravana. Kalidasa describes it at great length in 18

verses. Ravana comes to the war determined to make world devoid of Rama or Ravana.

Here Raghuvamsa repeats one of the famous statements of the Ramayana. The only

difference is that the earlier work applies the statement to Ravana while the later work makes

it a vow of Rama. Indra sends Matali with his chariot and armour to help Rama. In the

course of the fight, strangely, Kalidasa describes Ravana as having many thighs along with

heads and hands. A fierce battle ensures between Ravana and Rama. The battle becomes

memorable and unique for all times to come. Again, Raghuvamsa echoes another famous

expression from Ramayana. Finally Rama discharges Brahmastra. It multiplies into tens and

in one-stroke cuts off the ten heads of Ravana and he falls dead. According to the

Ramayana, at the suggestion of Matali, Rama releases Brahmastra. It races towards Ravana

and piercing his heart enters the netherworld. Thus, Ravana’s end takes place. Kalidasa

ends the canto by saying that Rama, having accepted Sita after her purification in fire, installs

Vibhishana on the throne of Lanka, and return to Ayodhya by flying in Pushpaka

accompanied by Sugriva and Vibhishana.

Kalidasa indeed takes up a Herculian task in abridging the subject matter of five

kandas into one canto of hundred and odd verses. Yet he comes out successful without

cutting a sorry figure. In marshalling the subject matter of Ramayana, he has altogether

19

dropped some minor incidents and altered some other events here and there. He has also

transposed some situations from one place to other.

The events dropped altogether by Kalidasa :

1. The characters of Manthara, Guha, Maricha and Sabari.

2. Bharadwaja’s hospitality to Rama and Bharata. (An event repeated twice in Ramayana)

3. Agastya’s presentation of weapons to Rama (Repeated twice in Ramayana)

4. Reference to Pampa and Kishkindha.

5. Angada’s mission. (Repeated twice)

6. Sita’s aerial tour of the battlefield.

6. Hanuman’s bringing the mountain of herbs to revive the killed monkeys and Lakshmana.

(Repeated twice in Ramayana)

7. Two scenes in which Maya Sita is dragged and chopped off her head.

8. Meghanada’s Homa and using Brahmastra.

9. The burning of Lanka by the army of monkeys. (Repeated twice in Ramayana)

10. Agastya’s visit to the battle-field and initiation of Rama into Adityahridayam.

Kalidasa has effected changes in the following incidents:

1.Episode of crow

2. Viradha’s killing.

3. Surpanakha’s episode.

4. Illusory decapitation of Rama.

5. Hanuman’s bringing medicinal herb.

6. Ravana’s physical appearance.

7. Killing of Ravana.

Kalidasa has transported the following events from one place to other:

1.Incident of Crow (From Sundarakanda to Aranyakanda).

2.Illusion of decapitation of Rama.

3. Killing of Indrajit and Kumbhakarna.

4.Ravana attacking Lakshmana with Sakthi missile.

* * * * * *

ANALYSIS V: CANTO XIII

Having rushed through the incidents of the main Ramayana in twelfth canto, Kalidasa

leisurely flies back in this canto describing the varied beauties of India from Malya Mountain

to Ayodhya. Taking clue from the list of ashtadasavarnanas-descriptions of eighteen kinds, as

a must for Mahakavyas, here the poet describes the ocean, in its grandeur and vastness in

the first 16 verses. Next he describes the landscapes in great detail. The various places

20

visited by Rama and the party--the hermitages and sages they paid visit to- are mentioned in

reverse order. The hermitages of Agastya, Satakarni, Sutikshna, Sarabhanga and Atri are

described. The mountains Malyavat and Citrakuta, the rivers Godavari, Mandakini and

Sarayu and Pamka lake are described picturesquely. Kalidasa describes Vipralamba

sringara when Rama relives his searching for Sita, spending long days and nights through the

rainy days etc., The cream of the descriptions of Kalidasa –the nisarga Kalidasa –finds its

place in this canto. As the Pushpaka reaches Prayaga, Kalidasa looses himself in the

beauties of the confluence of Ganga and Yamuna by piling simile over simile in one unbroken

chain in four verses. Rama’s filial love for Sarayu bursts forth in another four verses. The

canto ends when Bharata receives the party and all reach the outskirts of Saketa. Here

Kalidasa makes good of his talents for the restraint he had to put up with in the previous

canto. Most of the scenes that are omitted in the earlier canto have been accommodated in

this canto. This entire canto is the creation of the fertile imagination of Kalidasa.

Just like the Digvijaya of Raghu, Swayamvara of Indumati and wailing of Aja and the

hunting of Dasaratha, this aerial journey of Rama is the original contribution of Kalidasa to the

growth of Valmiki Ramayana. A close comparison of this canto and canto 111 of

Yuddhakanda of the Ramayana reveal the fact that it is the Ramayana, which added the

aerial journey following Raghuvamsa. For there is no need for an aerial description in the

Ramayana, as all the scenes in Rama’s trekking from Ayodhya to Srilanka have been fully

described earlier in detail and there is not even an iota of extra information that is given in

canto 111. But it is not so in Raghuvamsa. Canto XIII fills the omission in the previous canto.

Not only that, there are some striking discrepancies in the aerial descriptions of the

Ramayana.

1. Canto 110 of Yuddhakanda ends thus:

®úÉPÉ´ÉähÉɦªÉxÉÖYÉÉiɨÉÖi{É{ÉÉiÉ Ê´É½þɪɺɨÉÂ*

ªÉªÉÉè iÉäxÉ Ê´É¨ÉÉxÉäxÉ ½ÆþºÉªÉÖHäòxÉ ¦Éɺ´ÉiÉÉ**

(VI.110, 22.23)

Canto 111, which describes the return journey, begins thus:

+xÉÖYÉÉiÉÆ iÉÖ ®úɨÉähÉ iÉÊuù¨ÉÉxɨÉxÉÖkɨɨÉÂ*

=i{É{ÉÉiÉ ¨É½þɨÉäPÉ&º´ÉºÉxÉäxÉÉä%rùiÉÉä ªÉlÉÉ**

(VI.111.1)

Towards the end of the canto 111, the aeroplane passes over the hermitage of

Bharadwaja, Sringiberapura and finally arrives at the city of Ayodhya. Rama asks Sita to

salute Ayodhya.

B¹ÉÉ ºÉÉ où¶ªÉiÉä +ªÉÉävªÉÉ ®úÉVÉvÉÉxÉÒ Ê{ÉiÉÖ¨ÉǨÉ*

+ªÉÉävªÉÉÆ EÖò¯û ´ÉènùÒʽþ |ÉhÉɨÉÆ {ÉÖxÉ®úÉMÉiÉÉ**

(VI.111.29)

But canto 112 begins with the arrival of Rama and others at the hermitage of

Bharadwaja.

21

{ÉÚhÉæ SÉiÉÖnÇù¶Éä ´É¹Éæ {ÉÆSɨªÉÉÆ ™ôI¨ÉhÉÉOÉVÉ&*

¦É®úuùÉVÉɸɨÉÆ |ÉÉ{ªÉ ´É´Éxnäù ÊxɪÉiÉÉä ¨ÉÖÊxɨÉÂ**

(VI.112.1)

The sage Bharadwaja offers felicitations to Rama and directs him to enter Ayodhya

the next day.

+PªÉÈ |ÉÊiÉMÉÞ½ÂþhÉänù¨ÉªÉÉävªÉÉÆ ·ÉÉä MÉʨɹªÉʺÉ

(VI.112.15)

In the beginning of canto 113, Rama, turning to Ayodhya, sends Hanuman to

Bharata.

+ªÉÉävªÉÉÆ i´ÉÊ®úiÉÉä MÉi´ÉÉ ¶ÉÒQÉÆ —´ÉÆMɺÉkɨÉ*

VÉÉxÉÒʽþ EòʝÉiÉ EÖò¶É™ôÒ VÉxÉÉä xÉÞ{ÉÊiɨÉÎxnù®äú**

(VI.113.3)

Thus it is clearly seen that canto VI.111 of Ramayana, is inserted later between

cantos 110 and 112. It is inserted only after the composition of Raghuvamsa. In

Raghuvamsa Rama and his party directly go to Ayodhya without stopping at the hermitage of

Bharadwaja, where as according to the Ramayana they had a halt at the hermitage of the

Sage. (As a matter of fact Kalidasa altogether drops the sage Bharadwaja in Raghuvamsa).

Forgetting this fact Ramayana interpolators have composed canto 111 saying that Rama and

others directly reached Ayodhya. Thus, the interpolators who added canto 111 have not

taken care to reconcile it with the beginning of canto 112.

2. While the canto in Raghuvamsa is full of lively and picturesque, descriptions, the

canto in Ramayana is just a list of places without any memorable ideas.

3. Ramayana mentions that Sita got the aeroplane stopped at Kishkindha and invited

Tara and other female vanaras to join her to go to Ayodhya. This idea itself farfetched one.

4. Ramayana mostly mentions the places omitted in canto 13 of Raghuvamsa viz.,

the city of Lanka, the spot of night halt on crossing the ocean, the mountain Hiranyanabha(?)

who gave place for Hanuman to rest, the sacred place of Rameswaram, the Kishkindha,

Rshyamuka mountain, the hermitage of Sabari and spots where Kabandha, Jatayus and

Viradha were killed. All these are mere names without any captivating descriptions.

5. Canto 111 of Ramayana closely follows the expressions of canto 13 of

Raghuvamsa. Vide appendix.

In canto 13, Kalidasa makes some changes. As mentioned before, Rama does not

stop at the hermitage of sage Bhardwaja. Even before starting from Lanka, Rama should

have sent Hanuman to Bharata. But Rama has no suspicion about the intentions of Bharata.

He has unshakable faith in Bharata and is sure that Bharata would return the kingdom.

Rama according to the Ramayana, on the other hand, suspects Bharata and asks Hanuman

to closely observe his reactions when the return of Rama is told. This is not praiseworthy for

Rama. Again when Bharata meets Rama and others, the royal mothers or Satrighna does

not follow him. Rama meets them in Ayodhya. This is not so in the Ramayana.

22

It seems that the last cantos of Yuddhakanda of Valmiki Ramayana must have been

retouched45 in the light of Raghuvamsa. Kalidasa describes that when Rama introduced

Vibhishana and Sugriva to Bharata, he (Bharata), overlooking Lakshmana, greeted them.

Only afterwards does he meet Lakshmana and salute him and Lakshmana lifting Bharata

embraces him closely46. Thus, Kalidasa makes Lakshmana elder to Bharata. All

commentators, Caritravardhana, Hemadri, Vallabha except Mallinatha, accept this

interpretation47. Even Bhasa in his Pratimanatakam refers to the seniority of Lakshmana.

The relevant context in Ramayana is described in canto 115.33 of Yuddhakanda48. Here also

the elderliness of Lakshmana is apparent. But some commentators relying on the horoscope

of the four princes given in the foot-notes of Balakanda and considering Bharata to be elder to

Lakshmana, interpret this verse artificially in tune with the horoscope. (Vide com. Cv ). But as

the horoscope is, now, proved to be an interpolation49, Kalidasa ‘s view is strengthened. In

turn it proves that reference to Lakshmana’s seniority in this context in the Ramayana is

based on Canto 13 of Raghuvamsa. According to Ramayana, after saluting Lakshmana and

Sita, Bharata meets Sugriva and Vibhishana

Again Kalidasa mentions monkeys riding the elephants in human form. The same is

refered to by the Ramayana also.

®úɨÉÉYɪÉÉ ½þÊ®úSɨÉÚ{ÉiɪÉ& iÉnùÉxÉÓ

EÞòi´ÉÉ ¨ÉxÉÖ¹ªÉ´É{ÉÖ®úɯû¯û½Öþ& MÉVÉäxpùÉxÉÂ*

R.V XIII.74

iÉä EÞòi´ÉÉ ¨ÉÉxÉÖ¹ÉÆ°ü{ÉÆ ´ÉÉxÉ®úÉ& EòɨɰüÊ{ÉhÉ&*

Rama. VI.115.35

Thus, this canto 13 starts with the departure of Rama from Lanka and ends with his

arrival in Ayodhya. Even if the entire canto is eliminated, there will not be any disturbance to

the narration of the story. Canto 14 naturally and logically follows canto12 without any jerks.

Note: There seems some disturbance in the order of the slokas of this canto 13. The

description of Janasthana in verses 22 to 25 of the present text is out of order. Janasthana

did not lie south of Kishkindha. While travelling from Lanka, Rama must come first to

Malyavat mountain and then to Kishkindha, Pampa and then only to Janasthana and not

earlier. Thus verses 23 to 25 must naturally come after verse 32. Similarly, the description of

the hermitage of Atri and Anasuya must come before the description of Citrakuta Mountain.

Thus verses 47 to 49 must come after verse 52 and before verse 53.

* * * * *

23

ANALYSIS VI - CANTO XIII

KALIDASA’S SCHEME IN COMPOSING CANTO XIII

What prompted Kalidasa to compose this canto? Though it has no story content in it,

it has remained a memorable piece of literature. Kalidasa, in this canto, made good the

opportunity of Rama’s return journey to Ayodhya for strengthening the conjugal bond of love

between Rama and Sita.

Sita had for one year put up with the cruel, rude threatening and impudent behaviour

of Ravana with un-flickkering faith in Rama. Often she had to pass through a hell of time in

Lanka. Many a time she had collapsed through agony. Only the string of hope of uniting with

her husband made her survive from moment to moment.

+ɶÉɤÉxvÉ& EÖòºÉ֨ɺÉoù¶ÉÆ |ÉɪɶÉÉäÁÆMÉxÉÉxÉÉÆ,

ºÉt&{ÉÉÊiÉ |ÉhÉ滃 ¾þnùªÉÆ Ê´É|ɪÉÉäMÉä ¯ûhÉÊrù.

Even when Rama crossed over the ocean and attacked Ravana, there was no respite

for her misery. During the battle, many a time her hopes were almost razed to earth. When

finally Ravana was killed, it seemed that at last her grief had come to an end. She was

eagerly expecting Rama to rush to her and take her into his embrace. But Rama had his own

plans. When she was eager to meet her lord not caring for cosmetics, she was commanded

to have a bath and dress herself well. Then only leisurely she was led in to the presence of

her husband Rama. She was aghast to realize that she was led not into the privacy of Rama,

but into an assembly of monkeys and bears and demons, all strangers to her. She was

stunned to stone when asked, as though a commoner, to remove her veil before every one.

She could not understand anything that is happening. Her mind became numb. And then fell

the bolt from the blue-her ignominy of rejection at the hands of her very lord. Her home was

shattered. Her crystal like heart was broken into thousand-pieces. Her life, nay herself, sunk

into the bowels of the earth before her own eyes. She was burnt with rage and injury of

shame. She- a jatavedasuddha- could never become her self again. Valmiki left Sita to herself

and called her history a great saga of sacrifice sitayah caritam mahat.

But Kalidasa is not Valmiki. His sensitive heart moaned for Sita through pity and

compassion. He wanted to set the things right. He wanted his Rama to amend for what had

been done to Sita. Thus evolves the creation of the return journey of Rama and Sita into

canto XIII. In this canto Kalidasa had tried his best to break the ice between the couple. He

envisages a two-tier flying vehicle, which gives scope and opportunity for the privacy to the

couple away from the crowd. Left to them selves, Rama and Sita relive some of the very

intimate moments they have lived together. Rama pours out the agony he has under gone

when he was separated from Sita. Rama chooses some very touching moments to impress

upon Sita of how much he loved her even in her absence. Rama draws the attention of Sita,

24

now to wonderful and awesome sights of ocean, then to the serene and religious atmosphere

of hermitages, again to grandeur of peaks and mountains and to the heart rendering moments

of pangs of separation and finally to the ever green moments of togetherness in private life.

Thus Rama engages and enlivens stone-faced and silent Sita.

This canto is not like the usual prosaic indirect narrative chapter. It is in the form of

live running commentary--no, not in a dull and insipid monologue, but in the form of a heart--

to--heart talk of Rama and Sita. Though Sita has not opened her lips and uttered a single

syllable and it is Rama who did the entire talking-yet, the reader can easily see Sita

participating in the conversation through her reaction and appreciation to what ever Rama

had said and described. Kalidasa uses words like candi, bhiru, priye, manini, karabhoru,

ayatakshi, peshalamadhye, prakritipragalbhe etc., to suggest that Sita also participated in the

conversation.

In this canto Kalidasa soars high in poetic imagination. Here we have some of the

best moments of literature. Kalidasa, with few strokes, brings out many pen-pictures. Almost

the entire canto is a gallery of picturesque portraits. At the same time, he squeezes the hearts

of Sita and the readers with the description of sweet pain-vipralambhasringara- pangs of love

in separation.

Conceiving the canto in itself, it is a watermark in the poetry of Kalidasa. Execution of

imagination has attained new peaks of heights in poetry. Composing this canto must have

probably given an idea to Kalidasa to pen Meghadutam or it may be vice-versa.

* * * * * * *

ANLYSIS VII -CANATOS XIV AND XV

Kalidasa takes up the story of later life of Rama in these cantos. The Uttarakanda is

obviously an addition50-a Khilakanda- to the Ramayana. It is entirely an independent work

just as Harivamsa. The authentic Ramayana ends with Yuddhakanda. Yuddhakanda towards

its close describes the proverbial ‘Ramarajya’. It says how Rama, in company of sons and

brothers and friends, ruled the earth for thousands of years performing many sacrifices.

®úÉPɴɝÉÉÊ{É vɨÉÉÇi¨ÉÉ |É{ªÉ ®úÉVªÉ¨ÉxÉÖkɨɨÉÂ*

<ÇVÉä ¤ÉÖ½ÖþÊ´ÉvÉèªÉÇYÉè& ºÉºÉÖiɦÉÉiÉÞ¤ÉÉxvÉ´É&**

The Yuddhakanda also has phalashruti--merits of reading, listening and writing

Ramayana- suggesting that the entire composition has come to a logical end.

The Uttarakanda begins with the arrival of sages to Ayodhya to felicitate Rama. But

strangely they narrate the exploits of Ravana, Indrajit and Hanuman in an unending manner.

This portion occupies 1/3 of the Uttarakanda. Inconceivably, the Uttarakanda goes back to

the portion of the Yuddhakanda and describes how Rama felicitated and sent away Janaka,

Yudhajit, Sugriva and Vibhishana and their followers51. Rama after returning the aerial car

25

Pushpaka back to Kubera, spent happily in the company of Sita. From canto 42 onwards the

Uttarakanda proper deals with Sita’s abandonment and etc.,

Canto XIV of Raghuvamsa begins with Rama’s entry into Ayodhya. His meeting with

his mothers, coronation celebrations, honouring of the allies in battle are narrated in quick

succession. Then in one verse it says how Rama listened to the accounts of his adversaries

in war narrated by the sages who come to felicitate him. After their departure, when half a

month, filled with festivities, has elapsed, Rama sent away Vibhishana and Sugriva with their

men after presenting then with gifts at the hands of Sita herself. Then he sends back the

Pushpaka plane to Kubera. Kalidasa describes in one verse52 the administration of Rama,

which gave rise to the phrase ‘Ramarajyam’. Rama and Sita spend days with ease and

happiness. In due course Sita becomes pregnant and the couple are happy.

Sita expresses her desire to visit the hermitages once again. Rama agrees happily to

comply with her wish. Meanwhile the spy Bhadra reports about the slander about the

character of Sita. According to the Uttarakanda, Rama enquires his courtiers regarding the

rumours about Sita. All of them confirm it. In Raghuvamsa, Rama does not need a

confirmation. Rama has full faith in Sita and knows her to be innocent. He cannot, at the

same time, keep her in his palace. He oscillates between his love for Sita and his reputation.

Finally he decides to abandon Sita. He orders Lakshmana to take Sita to the forest and to

leave her there near the hermitage of Valmiki. Accordingly, Lakshmana leads Sita away to

the forest. On the way, Sita sees ill omens and prays for the welfare of Rama and his

brothers. After crossing the Ganga, Lakshmana informs Sita about her abandonment and

asks her to take shelter in the hermitage of Valmiki. Sita swoons on hearing the news of her

abandonment and regaining her sense wails at great length. She sends message to Rama in

seven verses. In them she asks Rama to protect the varnasrama dharmas53. In the

Uttarakanda, Sita asks Rama to protect the people as his own brothers54. Valmiki meets the

destitute Sita and consoles her and offers shelter. He is angry with Rama for his unjust act.

Kalidasa uses very strong words against Rama to show the mind of Valmiki55. The

Uttarakanda is silent about the reaction of Valmiki. Living in the hermitage of Valmiki, Sita,

wearing bark garments, bathing in rivers, receiving the guests, somehow carries on with life,

only for the continuation of lineage of her husband. The canto comes to an end by informing

us that Rama, after giving up Sita did not marry another woman and that he performed many

sacrifices keeping by his side the golden image of Sita.

Canto XV begins with the arrival of sages who were tormented by the demon Lavana.

They pray to Rama to destroy the demon. Rama directly appoints Satrighna to kill the

demon. The Uttarakanda has long discussion in which all the brothers, Lakshamana, Bharata

and Satrighna, plead to Rama to assign the task to each of them. On his way to Mathura,

Satrighna halts at the hermitage of Valmiki and offers salutations to the sage. On the same

night Sita gives birth to two male babies. Knowing this Satrighna feels happy but proceeds to

Madhupaghna without meeting Sita. But in the Uttarakanda56, Satrighna goes to Sita and

26

compliments her on the eve of the birth of the sons. Along with the birth of Kusa and Lava,

Kalidasa57 mentions the birth of two sons each to Lakshmana, Bharata and Satrighna also.

The Uttarakanda forgets to mention their birth of sons to the brothers of Rama until the

Mahaprasthana. Raghuvamsa describes the fight with Lavana in 12 verses. After killing

Lavana, Satrighna builds the city Mathura and rules over it for many years until his sons come

of age. Meanwhile Valmiki performs various rites connected with the birth of Kusa and Lava

and when they grow in age teaches them four Vedas along with his own composition

Ramayana. Singing the Ramayana in front of their mother, the twins lighten her misery.

Having ruled Mathura for some years, (the Uttarakanda mentions a period of 12 years) and

entrusting the kingdom to sons Satrighatin and Subahu, Satrighna returns to Ayodhya. On

his return journey, he merely passes by and avoids going to the hermitage of Valmiki. But

according to the Uttarakanda58, he pays a second visit to Valmiki. In Raghuvamsa, when

Satrighna meets Rama on his return, he abstains from reporting the birth of Kusa and Lava as

per the instruction of Valmiki59. The Uttarakanda is silent about the incident but mentions that

Rama has sent Satrighna back to Madhura. Then Kalidasa takes up the story of Sambuka

and describes it in 15 verses. Here also there is a remarkable similarity between the

narrations of Kalidasa and Valmiki in action and phraseology. After killing Sambuka, Rama

begins horse sacrifice. Instructed by Valmiki, Kusa and Lava recite the Ramayana before

Rama. As soon as Rama comes to know about his sons, he rushes to Valmiki and offers

himself at his feet. But Rama in the Uttarakanda coolly listens to the Ramayana for many

days after coming to know his sons, and then only sends a message to Valmiki. He demands

Sita to go through the test of purity. On the other hand Kalidasa makes Valmiki request

Rama to take back Sita. According to the Uttarakanda, Valmiki himself testifies to the purity

of Sita on the strength of his penance. On Rama wanting a test60 of purity from her, Sita calls

upon the earth to testify to her sanctity and in the processes descends into the womb of

netherworld. Then follow in quick succession the coronation of the young sons of four

Dasarathis and the arrival of Yama and Durvasa and prayopavesa of Lakshmana. Kalidasa

ends canto XV and with it Rama’s story with the ascent of Rama to his abode of Vishnu.

* * * * * *

27

COMPARATIVE STUDY OF

RAGHUVAMSA AND THE RAMAYANA

“ You cannot blow dust away without making a lot of people cough”

Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh.

“ We are wrong to ask WHY? What we really ought to ask is WHY NOT? ”

George Bernard Shaw.

“ What a sad age!

When it is easier to smash

An atom than a prejudice.”

Albert Einstein

The analysis of the cantos X to XV of Raghuvamsa dealing with the story of Rama,

will reveal some interesting facts. It is bewildering to see Kalidasa mercilessly yet skilfully

abridging the ancient, original and authentic Ramayana of five kandas into a single canto XII

consisting of 104 verses. Why had he to condense the entire original Ramayana into single

canto? What made him to dwell leisurely and exhaustively only upon Balakanda and

Uttarakanda, which are recognizably later additions to the Ramayana? Kalidasa has allotted

179, 104 and 190 verses respectively for Balakanda, original Ramayana and Uttarakanda

portions. It is not that both the Bala and Uttarakandas are rich in incidents of merit and that

the Mularamayana is dry of incidents. On the other hand, Kalidasa has one full canto for the

mere return journey of Rama from Lanka to Ayodhya. It is also strange that the incidents in

and narration of Balakanda and Uttarakandas go parallel with those of Raghuvamsa, with out

the slightest deviation. Not only the situations and ideas but also even the expressions--

words, phrases and sometimes whole verses--are common to both the works. From a close

comparison of the portions of Balakanda and Uttarakanda of Valmiki and cantos X to XV of

Raghuvamsa would, without doubt, reveal that one of the two is imitating and copying the

other61. Is it really so? Why should there be parallels only regarding Bala and Uttarakandas

and why not regarding the main, original Ramayana?

The unbiased scholar who goes meticulously through the material of both

Raghuvamsa and the Ramayana, as given in the previous chapters, without hesitation, will

come to conclusion that it is Ramayana, which is following Kalidasa in Balakanda and

Uttarakanda and not vice-versa. How is it so? What is the evidence?

If Kalidasa knew the Ramayana as is available today with all its seven kandas, then

why should he have different plans to compose different cantos? Why should he divide the

28

entire Ramayana story into three independent parts--the purvaramayana, the mularamayana

and the uttararamayana? It is only because that during the times of Kalidasa, the Ramayana

consisted of only Ayodhya, Aranya, Kishkindha, Sundara and Yuddhakandas.62 This was the

Ramayana that was summarised in the first sarga of now interpolated Balakanda.63 It had no

Balakanda and Uttarakanda dealing with the childhood and later life of Rama respectively.64

The Valmiki Ramayana of Kalidasa’s times, was really a heroic ballad that started from the

adulthood of Rama. It ended with the victory and coronation of Rama. In such a ballad there

was no need for the final end of the hero. But Kalidasa’s Raghuvamsa has great sweep. The

story of Rama is but a small part in the long history of the dynasty. The story of Rama comes

in while passing from one generation to another. Rama’s birth and the childhood must be

described before Ramayana story is summarised. So also the life of Rama must give way for

the next generation of Kusa. So Rama’s end has to be narrated. Earlier he had described

the birth and death of Raghu, Aja and Dasaratha and in future he is going to describe the

births and deaths of Kusa and Athithi and Agnivarna. Thus Kalidasa had to give the earlier

and later life of Rama.

Hence, Kalidasa had added on his own the childhood of Rama. Likewise, he also

described the later life of Rama culminating in his ascent to the abode of Vishnu. Regarding

the main story of Rama, anyway, he had to depend upon Valmiki. He had great regard for

‘kavi’ Valmiki and so he cannot allow himself to be compared with Valmiki.65 Thus in canto XII

he gave only the outlines of the saga of adventures of Rama. That is why he had to

condense the entire original work into one canto. The fragrance of jasmine cannot be

arrested, so also the poesy of a poet. In a similar way, Kalidasa, as a true, poet, could not

leave the Ramayana portion without affixing his signature-stamp of similes. He had decorated

the canto with plenty of similes and Arthantaranyasas.

As if to compensate for his restraint regarding the story of the main Ramayana and to

snub those66 who might allege that he has failed in adding creativity to the Ramayana story,

Kalidasa had created, out of nothing, canto XIII dealing with the return journey of Rama to

Ayodhya. Here Kalidasa soars high in his flight of fancy. He makes good of the opportunity

that he lost earlier. Whatever he could have depicted in the main story, but could not do so

earlier, the same was described here. Thus the canto became a canvas of beautiful

landscapes and pen pictures for which Kalidasa was well known.67 Thus the description of the

return journey acquired full significance. In course of time this canto gave rise to the inclusion

of return journey of Rama in Valmiki Ramayana68 and other works, where there is actually no

need for it because any way they have dealt with Rama’s passage through the forest in detail.

The inclusion of return journey in other works is superfluous and without interest. It remained

only as catalogue of mere names.

In creating the material for the childhood of Rama, Kalidasa need not have struggled.

By the time of Kalidasa, Rama had already become an incarnation of Vishnu for Hindus, a

Bodhisatva for Buddhists and one of the Baladevas for Jains. Ramopakhyana had not only

29

depicted that Vishnu had come down as Rama, but also various gods as bears and monkeys.

It mentioned that divine person Dundhubhi was commanded by Brahma to be born as

Manthara. Kalidasa took this incarnation theory and depicted it at great length in the eulogy

of Vishnu as praised by gods. As the adventures of Ravana were also well known, (as

mentioned in Ramopakhyana69) (Kalidasa) Vishnu in his consenting to help the gods refers

the same to. The performance of Putrakameshti70 by Dasaratha and appearance of a

divinebeing (fire god himself) with Payasam etc are just poet’s way of saying that the four

prince were born through religious rites and vratas. There is nothing abnormal or superhuman

in this event71. The division of Payasa amongst the three queens is logical justifying the fact of

the birth of Rama & co. The description of the state of pregnancy of Kausalya and co, the

birth of sons and rejoicings are part of any poem, as some of mandatory 18-descriptions.

Here two things are to be noted carefully. Kalidasa had not given the horoscope72 for the time

of the birth of Rama and others. The Ramayana, as available, contains this information as a

very important one. Both Janakiharana and Bhattikavya also do not mention the horoscope of

Rama. The other important point is that there is no actual childhood of Rama in the

Ramayana. Even in Raghuvamsa there is no description of real childhood of Rama just like

that of Pandavas and Krishna. Thus canto X actually contains no new material.

It is only when Rama and his brothers are stepping into marriageable age that

Visvamitra comes to Dasaratha. Sage Visvamitra’s coming into the life of Rama is intended

by Kalidasa to prepare Rama as a suitable match for Sita and there by arrange their

marriage. In works of heroism it is common for a prince to exhibit chivalry that lead to his

marriage with the heroine.

How did Kalidasa settle on Visvamitra for his Raghuvamasa? By the time of Kalidasa,

Visvamitra was well known73 already as a ‘romantic’ and ‘action’ oriented sage. It was his

name around which so many fascinating stories were woven. Among the ‘action’ oriented

sages like Narada, Agastya, and Durvasa, Visvamitra also became important and unique. The

main reason for this, probably, was that his was a special case of a Kshatriya attaining the

Brahminhood. Also, he, like Vasishtra, was intimately connected with the rulers of Solar

dynasty. Various Puranas and even Mahabharata relate many stories connecting him with the

kings of Ayodhya. Like Vasishta, he also helped Ikshwakus to become famous. He played

great roles earlier in the lives of Kalmashapada, the two Hariscandras, Trishanku. Some

Puranas, in all probability, might have already linked him with Rama. Kalidasa had earlier

introduced sage Durvasa in the Abhijnanashakuntalam and made famous his curse. In

Raghuvamsa itself he saw to it that Vashista played important role in the lives of Dilipa and

Aja. In future Valimiki is going to play another important role in the life of Sita. In the same

strain Kalidasa had introduced Visvamitra to Rama when he was about to enter married life.

Regarding the various incidents, which brought out Rama’s virtues like purity, valour

and prowess, some were scattered in various puranas and in the Mahabharata and others

were fashioned by Kalidasa on the analogy from the incidents of the Mahabharata and

30

Harivamsa. It was Mahabharata, which included the adventure of adolescence of Pandavas

earlier. Bharata had already grown into the Mahabharata. Along with it, Harivamsa also

became popular with the folk. The adventures that Pandavas and Krishna had gone through

before their marriages were always green in the minds of the people. Rama is Vishnu

himself. Many places must have become famous74 and holy as being associated with the

wanderings of and footprints of Rama and Sita. Madanashrama and Siddhashrama were two

such places picked up by Kalidasa for his Raghuvamsa.

It is strange that the saga of adventures should begin with the killing of a woman.

Krishna was famous for killing a female demon, Putana. Demon Hidimba, killed by Bhima,

must in all probability, might be a female demon. Vishnu was cursed for killing the wife of

sage Bhrigu. So Kalidasa and Rama could give up all hesitation75 in destroying the cruel

Yakshini Tadaka. The story of Ahalya is well known from the times of Vedas76 and in the

times of Kalidasa, it must be common knowledge that Ahalya, who had been turned into

stone, got back her beautiful form through the touch of the dust of the sacred feet of Rama.

So Kalidasa had incorporated this folk type story in his Raghuvamsa to high light the sanctity

of the dust of the feet of Rama.77 The appearance of Rama and Lakshmana at the court of

Janaka resembles that of Pandavas at the court of Pancalas. The contest of archery to win

the heroine is similar in both the works. The only difference is that in Mahabharata the

success in the contest is natural base on superior skill while in Raghuvamsa, it is a success of

supernaturalism worthy of incarnation of Vishnu. Both the heroines, Draupadi and Sita are of

non-human origin-ayonijas and their suitors aught to be of superhuman qualities. Though Sita

alone is viryashulka and the swayamvara was arranged for her sake only, on the occasion of

her marriage with Rama, three other brides were offered to the three brothers of Rama.

Kalidasa had described the marriage of Rama and Sita in about 25 verses in a grand manner.

He avoided describing the same even in a greater detail for he had already described Aja’s

marriage with Indumati in cantos VI and VII of Raghuvamsa. So he did not want to repeat the

same.

Dasarathirama meeting Bharagavarama is a watermark in the imagination of

Kalidasa. The Mahabharata78 narrated this event in Vanaparva in the context of various holy

places (Brigu tirtham) visited by Pandavas during their sojourn in the forest. According to it,

long after Rama’s marriage and when Rama was leading a happy married life, Parasurama

goes to Ayodhya79. Even at the news of his arrival, Dasaratha is terrified. Rama volunteers

to go out and meet the sage outside the city. Thus the encounter occurs. Kalidasa had

artistically transferred the event from Ayodhyakanda to Balakanda and made it a part of

marriage celebrations. It is usual for the poets, at the end of swayamvara celebrations of the

heroine, to describe the rejected and dejected suitors together attack the chosen bridegroom

and that the hero defeats them black and blue. In this way the hero is strengthened. It

happened at the marriage of Draupadi when Kauravas assisted by Jarasandha attacked

Pandavas. It also took place during the marriage of Rukmini. Kalidasa had already in canto

31

VII described how the failed suitors at the swayamvara of Indumati had attacked Aja when he

was proceeding to Ayodhya with the new bride. Kalidasa could describe the incident once

again. But in what manner? With one stroke he had created a striking and unique encounter.

Instead of the ordinary kings attacking Rama, suddenly it was the destroyer of royal races that

appear before Rama. When the encounter takes place between the two Ramas, the entire

nature is thrown out of balance. Every one and every thing is dazed. Just like Dasaratha, all

the readers also are terrified and they wait with accelerated breath for the out come of the

meeting.

It is a great occasion when two incarnations of Vishnu with diametrically

opposite qualities come face to face with each other. Parasurama is hot, imprudent and

harsh in speech while Rama is cool, considerate and soft in words. Kalidasa takes delight in

contrasting Bhargava against Raghava just as Valmiki80 took delight in contrasting

Surpanakha against Rama. Kalidasa narrates the encounter in detail in 34 verses almost half

of a normal canto. So much scope given for this incident itself shows that this encounter is

purely the creation of Kalidasa. The parallels between Ramayana and Raghuvamsa regarding

these portions are phenomenal and go to prove conclusively that it is Ramayana that closely

followed Raghuvamsa. Rama comes out of the encounter unscratched but with added

sparkle. An old incarnation has given way to the new one. The Brahmavirya has to

accept the superiority of Kshatriyavirya for once. Nay it is Ksatriyavirya in the garb of

Brahmin giving place to Brahmavirya in Kshatriya body. With master’s touch, Kalidasa had

selected Parasurama to crown the glory of Kodandarama. He, as a great artist, begins canto

XI with the arrival of Visvamitra and ends with the departure of Bhargava.

Kalidasa was a great visionary and a great hand in Kathasilpa-creation of situations.

He makes Rama at the very threshold of youth to come in contact with two epochs in Indian

Culture-sage Visvamitra, signifying the glorification of Brahmabala and sage Parasurama,

signifying the downfall of a Brahmana who gives up his Brahmabala. It is strange that these

two giants who represent two opposite strengths are related to each other by blood, a fact

known only to few people. Visvamitra was king Gadhi’s son whereas Parasurama was

Gadhi’s great grandson through daughter Satyavati. Thus Parasurama was a grand son of

Visvamitra through his sister Satyavati. Both were the products of tapobala of the grandfather

of Parasurama, sage Rucika. Both the sages were like the Siamese twins, in whose bodies,

the blood meant for the other was flowing. Visvamitra should have remained a king. So also

Parasurama, an ascetic. But fate had cruel laugh and the sages became otherwise. Such

sages help Rama, in their individual ways to register his name in the annals of heroes of the

land. They handover their respective strengths, Brahmavirya and Kshatriyavirya to Rama so

that he would succeed in his mission of destroying the demons headed by Ravana, a

combination of Bhrmattvam and Kshatriyattvam .

The Ramayana of Valmiki is always known to be one of six kandas with a

supplement81. The very name Uttarakanda signifies that it is a 'later' book, an addition to

32

the original. All the Ramayana scholars82, in one voice, agree on this point. The very fact

that the early Indian vernacular translations83 of the Ramayana did not include the

Uttarakanda proves that the ancient Indians also treated the Uttarakanda as not one of

Valmiki. On the other hand vernacular versions had separate Uttarakandas84. The oldest

literary version of Ramayana out side Indian subcontinent, the Javanese Ramayana

Kakavin of Yogisvara of Indonesia, assigned to the early tenth century, is also silent about

the Uttaraknada. Instead, we have a separate Javanese Uttarakanda in prose85. The basreliefs

of Loro Jonggrang complex at Prambannan in central Java, Indonesia and sculptures

of Ramayana scenes belonging to the Gupta period at Nacna Kuthara and Deogarh do not

include anything from the Uttarakanda86. The early literary compositions, the plays of Bhasa,

make no reference to any event of the Uttarakanda. Similarly, Bhatti, in his Ravanavadha,

ignored it completely, since he was particularly conservative in his choice of material.

Kshemendra and Somadeva in their Brihatkathamanjari and Kathasaritsagara can

find the earliest reference to the story of the Uttarakanda in Brihatkatha as retold

respectively. Asvaghosha also refers in his Saundarananda to the birth of Kusa and Lava in

the hermitage of Valmiki and thus shows his acquaintance with the story of Uttarakanda.

Vimalasuri87 who can be assigned to the period between first and third centuries A.D. has

described in detail the abandonment of Sita and the birth of the twins and their fight with

their father. Kalidasa summarises the incidents of the Uttarakanda in two cantos XIV and

XV of his Raghuvamsa. Bhavabhuti and Dinnaga have based their Uttararamacarita and

Kundamala on the Uttarakanda of Valmiki. Padmapurana has a detailed account of the

abandonment of Sita in its Patalakanda.

Regarding the period of the composition of the Uttarakanda, it is generally

recognised88 that the Uttarakanda is the latest addition to the Ramayana, later than the

Balakanda. Along with Balakanda, the Uttarakanda is assigned to the third stage of

evolution of the Ramayana. This third stage falls between the first and third centuries A.D89.

Scholars believe that external references indicate that the Uttarakanda was becoming

recognized as a part of the Ramayana during the Gupta period. They feel that the negative

evidence in the form of silence or omission of incidents from the Uttarakanda in the works

and sculptures belonging to Gupta period would be taken as pointing to the lack of

acceptance of the Uttarakanda rather than its non-existence. But it is with great reluctance

alone that the Uttarakanda was accepted into the fold of the Ramayana. This is inferred by

the presence of the Phalasruti at the end of the Yudhakanda, which refers to the work as

complete at that point.

Ramayana-scholars90 tried to trace the process by which both the Balakanda and

the Uttarakanda have been built out of a number of virtually independent episodes, many of

which have links with other puranic literature. The Uttarakanda reveals that two

independent parts, the Agastya's narration of the exploits of Ravana and the abandonment

of Sita, with obvious stylistic differences coming together to form the core of the text of the

33

Uttarakanda. Agastya's account is of a much ornate style, not dissimilar from the elaborated

passages of the second stage of the development of the Ramayana. The later part, with its

basically non-literary and puranic character, is narrated in a bare, unadorned style. There is

no real difference between the narration of obvious puranic insertions and the story of

abandonment of Sita. The * passages with good manuscript support and items in Appendix

I91 which have been assigned to the fourth stage, are the last to be added to the

Uttarakanda from 4th century onwards.

Kalidasa had described the later life of Rama in cantos XIV and XV. When one

reads the portion of abandonment of Sita in Raghuvamsa, a nagging feeling haunts that he

is reading the Uttarakanda a second time. In the entire history of Sanskrit literature, the

Uttarakanda and Raghuvamsa's cantos XIV and XV present a peculiar situation similar, to

that of Sudraka's 'Mriccakatika' and Bhasa's 'Daridracarudatta', but with one difference.

Either 'Mriccakatika' is an amplification of 'Carudatta' or 'Carudatta' is an abridgment of

'Mriccakatika'. But Raghuvamsa's cantos XIV and XV are neither abridgment of the

Uttarakanda nor the Uttarakanda is an amplification of Raghuvamsa's portion. Both are

almost of same length, narration and expression. As long as there is the Uttarakanda, no

poet, let alone Kalidasa, would compose cantos XIV and XV of the Raghuvamsa. The

scholarly world92 has, without hesitation, pulled Kalidasa for these two cantos. But one

cannot accept that the prince of Indian poets, would meekly, as though, through poverty of

ideas, reproduce the Uttarakanda in his magnum opus Raghuvamsa. Having avoided a

direct comparison93 and chance of waging competition with Valmiki94 in respect to

the main story of Rama,will Kalidasa allow himself to be judged and estimated in the

later part, which is well recognized as an appendix? One need not ponder over this

point at great length. The answer is obvious!

It is not Kalidasa who is parading his stolen ware, but the mediocre poet who

wrote the story Uttarakanda, A close comparison95 of the Uttarakanda with the cantos XIV

and XV of the Raghuvamsa will give more clues than one needs to substantiate this

assertion. The following are some:

1. In the beginning of canto XIV, Kalidasa refers to the honouring and bidding goodbye

to the allies of Rama and to the proverbial Ramarajya96. The Yuddhakanda of Valmiki

Ramayana97 towards its end narrates the same. But once again the composer of the

Uttarakanda takes up the subject as if it is not described earlier. This is because he

overlooked the ending of the Yudhakanda as he was following Kalidasa closely.

2. Kalidasa refers to Rama's listening to the accounts of Ravana in one verse98.

This led the writer of the Uttarakanda on a never-ending trail of the accounts of Ravana.

These accounts occupy almost half of the Uttarakanda. The cycle of the adventures of

Ravana was already famous by the time of the Ramopakhyanam of the Mahabharata, which

was assigned to the second stage of evolution of the Ramayana. Various puranas led by

the Mahabharata and Paumacaria of Vimalasuri and other Jain works exhaustively describe

34

the trials and victories of Ravana. The accounts of Ravana as found in the Uttarakanda,

had come from the pen of a poet whose ornate style is akin to the elaborate passages of the

second stage99, from which it may not differ, too greatly in date. The rest of the story, the

abandonment of Sita is clearly of the third stage of the Ramayana100. The entire portion is

narrated in a matter-of-fact, unadorned and non-literary style, a style that is generally used

for obvious puranic insertions101. It is generally believed that the enlargements are later

than the short originals. The Uttarakanda accounts of Ravana are loose, incoherent and

illogical. Actually, Rama wanted to know about the invincible Meghanada, the Indrajit. But

the sages go on narrating the exploits of Ravana alone. If indeed Kalidasa were later to the

Uttarakanda, he would not have referred at all to listening to the accounts of Ravana in his

eulogy of Raghus. In fact Kalidasa has referred to the exploits of Ravana in the beginning

of canto X. Thus this reference adds nothing to the context.

3. Kalidasa, as he is writing a Mahakavya, merely says that Valmiki was a friend

and well-wisher102 of Dasaratha and Janaka. He need not give full accounts of how and

when that was so. The Uttarakanda103 also mentions about this. But the Uttarakanda being

a Purana, must give details of the relationship that existed between Valmiki and Dasaratha.

It fails in giving the details because the entire Puranic literature lacks them.

4. Kalidasa104 mentions the birth of two sons each to Lakshmana, Bharata and

Satrughna along with the birth of Kusa and Lava. The Uttarakanda has totally forgotten the

birth of sons to Lakshmana and others till the very end of the Uttarakanda.

5. In Raghuvamsa, Sita's message to Rama to protect the varnasramadharmas has

a logical connection with the episode of Sambuka. In the Uttarakanda, Sita asks Rama to

treat and protect the citizens as his own brothers. This has no sense and connection with

the killing of Sambuka.

6. Rama meeting Agastya after killing Sambuka is not so important to be mentioned

in a Mahakavya like the Raghuvamsa. Yet Kalidasa refers to this incident, as he is original.

The Uttarakanda expands this incident into 2 or 3 cantos. If Kalidasa is really later to the

Uttarakanda, why should he refer to this event at all? What does he achieve?

7. Kalidasa mentions that Rama has performed many sacrifices of various kinds

before his meeting with Kusa and Lava. The Yuddhakanda also says that Rama had

performed many sacrifices including Aswamedha in company of brothers and sons. But the

Uttarakanda has a lengthy glorification of the Aswamedha sacrifice as though the

performance was the first of its kind.

8. The Uttarakanda, in ten cantos from 90 to 100, describes the passing away of the

royal mothers Kausalya and others, the settlement of the sons of Dasarathis and the final

ascent of Rama and others into the realm of Heaven in a most tasteless manner. Kalidasa

describes the same thing in about 15 verses and gives the impression that he is original. If

indeed he were later he would have dismissed the entire matter in a phrase or at the most a

35

verse as he did at the end of canto XII. We cannot expect Kalidasa to drag his feet

especially at this juncture, if he is really following the Uttarakanda.

9. The issue as to the earlierness of Kalidasa is clinched by the following verses of

Kalidasa from the Raghuvamsa:

1. ¶ÉÉäSÉxÉÒªÉÉ漃 ´ÉºÉÖvÉä ªÉÉ i´ÉÆ nù¶É®úlÉÉSªÉÖiÉÉ *

®úɨɽþºiɨÉxÉÖ|ÉÉ{ªÉ Eò¹ÉÂ]õÉiÉ Eò¹ÉÂ]õiÉ®Æú MÉiÉÉ* XV.43

2. ¨ÉÉ ¨ÉäÊiÉ ´ªÉɽþ®úiªÉä´É iÉκ¨Éx{ÉÉiÉɳý¨É¦ªÉMÉÉiÉÂ* XV.84

3. ´ÉÉRÂó¨ÉxÉ& Eò¨ÉÇʦÉ& {ÉiªÉÉè ´ªÉʦÉSÉ®úÉä ªÉlÉÉ xÉ ¨Éä *

iÉlÉÉ Ê´É¶ÉƦɮúÉ näù´ÉÒ ¨ÉɨÉxiÉvÉÉÇiÉ֨ɽÇþÊiÉ** XV.81

The first two quotes, a full verse and a half verse, occur almost verbatim in *

passages relegated to the foot-notes (of the critical Edition of the Uttarakanda of Valmiki

Ramayana), the passages assigned to fourth stage105 (the period between the fourth and

twelfth centuries A.D. of the Ramayana.

´ÉºÉÖvÉä ËEò xÉ nùÒhÉÉÇ漃 ®úÉYÉÉä nù¶É®úlÉÉSªÉÖiÉÉ*

®úɨɽþºiɨÉxÉÖ|ÉÉ{ÉÂiÉÉ Eò¹ÉÂ]õÉiÉ Eò¹ÉÂ]õiÉ®Æú MÉiÉÉ* (verse No. 1089 in the foot notes to

VII.64.11)

¨ÉÉ ¨ÉäÊiÉ ´ªÉɽþ®úi{ÉÞl´ÉÓ ºÉÉ SÉ {ÉÉiÉɳý¨É¦ªÉMÉÉiÉÂ* ( verse No. 1374 in the foot notes to

VII.88.14)

The third quote, the half verse finds a place in the Uttarakanda at VII.88. 10 in almost same

words:

iÉlÉÉ ¨Éä ¨ÉÉvÉ´ÉÒ näù´ÉÒ Ê´É´É®Æú nùÉiÉ֨ɽÇþÊiÉ*

Can we suppose that the Kavikulaguru has "utilised" these half verses and a full

verse from the Uttarakanda to enrich his classic Raghuvamsa, being very much impressed

by their strikingness? Can Kalidasa be influenced to such extent by the third and fourth

stage additions (a period between 4th and 12th centuries A.D) to the Ramayana? If he is

later, what made him to opt for these verses to retain them in his trendsetter

Raghuvasmsa?

Thus, the originality of Kalidasa and the borrowings by the composer of the

Uttarakanda are proved beyond doubt. The Uttarakanda-writer, just like the author of

Padmapurana, like a disciplined student, walks in the footsteps of Kalidasa regarding the

situations, ideas and expressions. He is not ashamed to lift wholesale expressions from

Kalidasa. On the other hand he seems to be religiously devoted to Kalidasa not to omit

anything from the Raghuvamsa. He follows the master of poets, verse-by-verse, idea-by36

idea, and even phrase-by-phrase. That is the reason for close parallels between the

Uttarakanda and the Raghuvamsa. The Uttarakanda has continued to be a separate and

independent book for many centuries (many vernacular translations have been composed

based upon this Uttarakanda as independent works), despite the fact that now and then

works like Brihatkatha, Paumacaria etc., amalgamated the later life of Rama into the main

story. Only after many centuries, only in the recent centuries, the Uttarakanda could

become part of the sacred Ramayana.

If Kalidasa is the first to compose the later story of Rama, as available today, even

earlier to the Uttarakanda, who and what, then did provide him the needed material? It is

now generally accepted that even earlier to Valmiki, the history of Rama was popular among

the people and that there must have been other Ramacaritas106. As Valmiki viewed Rama

as 'Purushottama', he did not utilize all the material regarding Rama. As a poet, Valmiki

selected some here and some there, and altogether avoided some other incidents. He also

has created some situations107 to highlight the pathos, the personality of Rama. The

Mahabharata, Harivamsa and Brihatkatha already knew the later story of Rama. Thus for

Kalidasa, it is not difficult to gather material that was scattered in various sources. He also,

as a poet, selected incidents from diverse sources and added others of his own creation.

Along with the story of abandonment of Sita, he has narrated two incidents from different

sources and added one of his own creations. The first creation is the introduction of Valmiki

as a character in the life of Rama. Kalidasa has envisaged that Valmiki should give shelter

to Sita, and educate and look after the sons of Sita. Thus Kalidasa made the poet Valmiki,

the author of the Ramayana to take part in the life of his own hero. This idea of making the

author of the Ramayana a participant in the life of the hero of the work must have been

influenced by the Mahabharata. Vyasa, the original author of Bharata, has already become

the progenitor of Kauravas and Pandavas and thus a character in his own composition. The

entire story of Bharata revolves round Vyasa from the beginning to the end. On similar

lines, Kalidasa has made Valmiki take part in the story of Rama. By the time of Kalidasa

there was no Uttarakanda. There was only the Purvaramayana consisting five kandas. Now

it is the Uttarakanda alone that revolves round Valmiki. Not the Purvaramayna. The first

incident he culled from other sources is regarding the killing of demon Lavana. Kalidasa

might have depended upon the Harivamsa for this incident. In describing the foundation of

Mathurapura, Harivamsa describes the confrontation between Lavana and Satrughna. The

second incident Kalidasa introduced is the killing of Sambuka. This incident is referred to as

one of the old times, in the Mahabharata108 during the course of the story of Jackal and

vulture.

One may object to the statement that Kalidasa was indeed responsible for making

Valmiki a character in the Uttarakanda. It is generally believed that Valmiki was a

contemporary of Rama and that he actually gave shelter to Sita. If indeed Valmiki was

contemporary of Rama, and Rama and others knew him earlier, why then there is no

37

adequate information regarding Valmiki in Ayodhyakanda and especially so in Aranyakanda

where Rama met Valmiki for the first time. According to the Uttarakanda and Raghuvamsa,

Valmiki was not at all stranger but a well-wisher and friend to Dasaratha and King Janaka.

How was that so? Entire Ramayana is silent about Valmiki, but in the Uttarakanda, Valmiki

becomes the contemporary and good wisher of Rama. Thus it s seen that the reference to

Valmiki in Aranykana was added very much later to make him Rama’s contemporary, when

the Uttarakanda was accepted as part of the Valmiki Ramayana.

During the times of Kalidasa, the abandonment of Sita for an unknown reason and

the confrontation between Rama and his sons might have been the common knowledge of

everyone. This confrontation might have led to the defeat of Rama at the hands of his sons

and ultimately to their coronation. At the end, Rama might have retired to the forest. This

confrontation might have been changed by Kalidasa who believed in the tradition of the

older generation should hand-over the reins of the kingdom on their own to the younger

generation and should retire to the forest. He scrupulously avoided the confrontation and

tamely and pathetically ended the story. This surmise is possible because even in the early

stages of the development of the Ramayana, even before the acceptance of the

Uttarakanda in to the fold of the Ramayana, this confrontation between Rama and his sons

was well known to Brihatkatha, Paumacaria and other Jaina works. On the other hand, the

Hindu works intentionally avoided this confrontation. It is only in 9th century that

Bhavabhuti, for the first time, hinted at the confrontation, but the confrontation is shifted to

the younger generation i.e., between Candraketu, the son of Lakshmana and Lava, and the

son of Rama. Finally it was Jaiminibharata that gave importance to the confrontation

between Rama and his sons on the lines of the one between Arjuna and his son

Babruvahana. The Padmapurana has enriched this confrontation further with many details.

Even then, the orthodox Hindus have always maintained silence regarding this

confrontation. The fact that the folk literature has made capital use of this confrontation is a

different point altogether.

Kalidasa had rounded off the story of Rama by making Sita disappear into the

womb of Earth (probably because in the first instance she came out of the earth itself!) and

Rama ascends to the abode of Vishnu. The ascent of Rama and others towards the end

of the Uttarakanda was modelled on the description of Mahaprasthana of the Pandavas in

the Mahabharata.

Kalidasa, thus played a very important role in the development of the Valmiki

Ramayana. Only because of him, both the Bala and Uttarakandas were composed

and later added to the main Ramayana. * * * *

38

DATE OF KALIDASA

“A man should never be ashamed of admitting an error. By

doing so, he shows that he is developing, that he is cleverer today

than he was yesterday.”

Jonathan Swift

“Don’t let your minds be cluttered up, with the prevailing

doctrines.”

Alexander Fleming

“Further, these facts (literary facts), in order that they may be recognised,

require an appreciative attitude. For, unless the mind is free from previous intellectual

bias, it is not in the necessary condition to see them. Hence it is that there is always

a great controversy when a new theory, based upon facts, which are purely

subjective, is promulgated for the first time.”

-K.C.Pandey, in his Comparative Aesthetics.

“Without weighty grounds, one must not push aside the

unanimous Indian tradition; else one practices scepticism, not

criticism.”

H. Jacobi

“The opinions of Indian as well as of Western scholars with regard to the age of

Kalidasa still differ by centuries in spite of the fact that much has been unendingly written on

the subject.”109 The great Kalidasa, the Prince of Indian poets, the kavikulaguru, was the

centre of wild discussions and subjective prejudices. Down the ages, the date of Kalidasa was

dragged between 8th century B.C. and 12th century A.D. However, all said and done, only two

theories stand up today for serious consideration. Kalidasa either belongs to the age of

Sungas110 viz., period between 1st or 2nd centuries B.C. or to the Golden age of Guptas i.e., 4th

or 5th centuries A.D. Protagonists of both the theories base their arguments on the tradition

that Kalidasa was a court poet of the great king Vikramaditya of Ujjain. The tradition identifies

this Vikramaditya with the one who had the titles sakari and sahasanka and who started

Vikrama samvat Era beginning from 58 B.C.

Most of the western and some of the Indian scholars111, having failed to ascertain

historically a Vikramaditya earlier to the age of Guptas and considering the age of Guptas as

the Golden age of Sanskrit literature and fine arts, asserted that Candragupta II was the

Vikramaditya of the tradition and that Kalidasa had indeed lived in his court. Though much

has been said in support of this identification, no conclusive evidence could be adduced until

39

now. Much of what was said is nothing but vague feelings and rash declarations. In all these

discussions some very fine issues, which have to be examined closely, have been

overlooked.

First let us examine the opinions of the scholars:

Waber was the first to start the discussion regarding the date of Kalidasa. He has this

to state: “ Internal evidence, partly derived from the language, partly connected with the

phase of civilisation, presented to us, leads me to assign the compositions of Kalidasa’s three

dramas to a period from the second to the fourth centuries of our era, the period of the Gupta

princes, Candragupta & co, whose reigns correspond best to the legendary tradition of the

glory of Vikrama, and may perhaps be gathered up in it in one single focus.” 112

A.A.Macdonell has this to say: “ Thus, there is, in the present state of our knowledge

good reason to suppose that Kalidasa lived not in the sixth, but in the beginning of the fifth

century A.D. The question of his age, however, is not likely to be definitely solved till the

language, the style and the poetical techniques of each of his works have been minutely

investigated, in comparison with datable epigraphic documents, as well as with rules given by

the oldest Sanskrit treatises on poetics.”

“The reign of Chandragupta II Vikramaditya, at the beginning of the century A.D.,

therefore, seems in the meantime the most provable approximate date for India’s greatest

poet”113.

Vincent A. Smith, Early History of India.

“In my judgement it is now established that Kalidasa lived and wrote in the fifth

century, his literary activities extending over a long period, of probably not less than thirty

years. Although it is difficult to fix the dates of the great poet’s career with precision, it

appears to be probable that he began to write either later in the reign of Chandragupta II or

early in the reign of KumaraGupta I.” (Highlighting is done for the sake of emphasis.)

“It is not unlikely that the early descriptive poems of Kalidasa, namely, the

Ritusamhara and the Meghaduta, may have been composed before A.D.413, that is to say,

while Chandragupta II was on the throne, but I am inclined to regard the reign of

Kumaragupta I (413-55) as the time during which the poet’s later works were composed, and

it seems possible, or even probable, that the whole of his literary career fell within the limits of

that reign. It is also possible that he may have continued writing after the accession of

Skandagupta. But I have no doubt that he flourished in the fifth century during the time when

the Gupta power was at its height.”114

A.B. Keith, Sanskrit Drama:

Basing on the astronomical evidence present in the works of Kalidasa, the professor

says,

“A date not probably prior to A.D. 350 is indicated by such passage.”- pp.146

“It is, therefore, most probable that he flourished under Candragupta II of Ujjan, who

ruled up to about A.D.413 with the style of Vikramaditya, which is perhaps alluded to in the

40

name Vikramorvasiyam, while the Kumarasambhava’s title may well hint a compliment on the

birth of young Kumaragupta, his son and successor.”

“Moreover the poems of Kalidasa are essentially those of Gupta period, when the

Brahmanical and Indian tendencies of the dynasty were in full strength and the menace of the

foreign attack was for the time evanescent.” Pp.147115.

A.B. Keith, History of Sanskrit Literature.

“None-the-less it is difficult to dissociate Kalidasa from the great moments of the

Gupta power.” Pp 8 n

“Kalidasa, then lived before A.D. 472, and probably at a considerable distance, so

that to place him about A.D. 400 seems completely justified.” 116pp.82

Winternitz, A History of Indian Literature:

“I think it is not wrong to assume, therefore, that in the epic Raghuvamsa, all sorts of

references to Chandragupta II have been made.” Pp.54

“In addition, there are certain other conditions that make it probable that

Chandragupta II was the Vikramaditya under whom Kalidasa lived. “54

“Consequently the age of Kalidasa gets limited approximately in between 350 and

472 A.D., the reign of Chandragupta II extending circa 375-413 A.D.”117 55

Now let us examine some important issues involved in the discussion:

Vikramaditya of tradition ruled Malwas with Ujjain as capital. But the Guptas never

had Ujjain as their capital. Pataliputra of the Magadha Empire continued to be the capital of

the Gupta emperors also, though towards the end of the Gupta dynasty, the last emperors

had Ayodhya and Kashi as their capital118. The Malva province was outside the Magadh

empire since 250 B.C. up to 350 A.D. The Eastern and the Western Malvas were under

different chieftains who maintained their independence in opposition to Magadh Empire.

During the time of Samudragupta, the Eastern Malva was subjugated. Chandragupta II, in a

protracted war extending to 20 years between 388 A.D. and 409 A.D. could bring the Western

Malvas under his subjugation119. He could not have transferred the capital to Ujjain, as it was

risky to repose confidence in a people who always wanted to be free. During the time of

Purugupta and his successor Buddha (472A.D.), the Guptas lost control over the Malvas for

all times to come. From the above historical fact it is clear, that Ujjaini could not have enjoyed

the position of chief city of the Guptas.

There are discrepancies regarding the titles of Vikramaditya and Candragupta II.

Vikramaditya was known as Sakari, Sahasanka and Sakakarta. More than two Gupta

emperors120 had the title Vikramaditya viz., Samudragupta, Candragupta II, Skandagupta and

Purugupta. There is no agreement among scholars regarding the Gupta king who could be

Vikramaditya and thus the patron of Kalidasa. That is why V.A. Smith121 intelligently assigns

Kalidasa to three Gupta emperors, Candragupta II, Kumaragupta and Skandagupta. But this

is absurd and Winternitz122 also feels so. Candragupta II, whom many take as Vikramaditya,

had not defeated any Sakas. (Where are the Sakas in the fourth century?) Even before the

41

rise of Kushanas, the Sakas lost control over India. As a warrior Candragupta II faded away

before Samudragupta and Skandagupta. Samudragupta conquered much of the empire.

What Candragupta II conquered was only the western Malvas from the Kshatraps, after a

protracted war stretching over 20 years. So Candragupta II could not be Vikramaditya, the

greatest warrior who could take the title Sahasanka. The real Vikramaditya must be a native

of and must have been brought up in the Malva province. He must be one who heroically

fought against Sakas as a national hero of Malva. Candragupta II has not started any era or

was he in anyway connected with an era. Thus he could not be Sakakarta. Thus the

identification of Candragupta II with Vikramaditya of tradition fails.

Most of the Western scholars had rejected totally the tradition of Vikramaditya and the

founding the Vikrama Samavat Era starting from 58 B.C. Yet when they prop up Candragupta

II as the patron of Kalidasa, they all fall back on the supposed tradition123. There is no positive

evidence connecting Kalidasa with the Guptas as such. In the absence of the tradition making

Kalidasa a court poet of Vikramaditya, Kalidasa could not be associated with the Gupta kings

on any evidence. Either one has to believe the tradition in totality or not. There is no question

of partial applicability.

Even when there was no direct evidence of connection between Kalidasa and Gupta

emperors, why, then, the western scholars did settle on Candragupta II as the patron of

Kalidasa? As it had happened to Sir William Jones in 18th century, so it was with Waber and

Lassen in 19th century. The closeness between the names of Sandracootus and Candragupta

gave thrill to Sir William Jones and he jumped to declare to the world, though on insufficient

proof, the identification of Candragupta Maurya as the contemporary of Alexander, the great.

This identification led to the foundation of ‘Sheet Anchor Theory’, which gave rise to the

synchronism of advent of Alexander in to India and the crowning of Candragupta Maurya as

the founder of Maurya Empire. Thus the identification became the corner stone of the entire

chronology Indian history. So also the title ‘ Vikramaditya’ of Candragupta II made these

scholars to assure the world that this Vikramaditya of Guptas was the legendary patron of

Kalidasa, though at the same time, some not hesitating to denounce the tradition of

Vikramaditya in the first instance. To substantiate the Gupta’s connection with Kalidasa they

had to prop up Gupta age as the Golden Age of Sanskrit Literature and fine arts. Thus they

declared that the Golden age of Gupta’s in fact corresponded to the Golden Age of Ornate

Poetry124. The Gupta’s was the period of renaissance of Hinduism, literature and arts. Max

Muller’s theory of dark ages (though later dismissed universally) and availability of large

collection of Sanskrit inscriptions of the Guptas, gave support to this Golden age theory.

Scholar after scholar had decorated this mansion of Golden age of Guptas. Great poets and

dramatists like Bhasa, Sudraka, Kalidasa, Vishakadatta and works like Kamasutra and

Arthasastra etc., and Puranas were brought within the Gupta period to make it really a golden

period125. Now the question is whether the Gupta’s age was really a golden one? First of all,

was there any need to coin words like ‘renaissance’, ‘revival’, and ‘Golden age’?

42

All the scholars had agreed in one voice that the Ornate or court poetry was

cultivated in India long before the age of Guptas. The evidence attested by Patanjali in his

Mahabhasya, the existence of Pingala’s manual of prosody would prove that erotic poetry

was popular in the 2nd century B.C126. Asvhaghosha’s epics, in respect of language, style and

narration, belong to the category of ornate court poety of later ages. “The finished form of the

epics and the perfect techniques of the dramas of Ashvaghosa prove that he had composed

them only according to some long-standing model”127. Not only the ornate poetry was

prevalent among scholars but also it was used for the consumption of the people at large.

Various inscriptions between 1st and 3rd centuries of Christian era, either in Sanskrit or Prakrit

languages shows all the characteristics of the style of ornate prose and verse128. “The fact

that already in the 2nd century the style of ornate poetry was carried over to prose and was

used in inscriptions also prove that this style had developed considerably long ago.”129 Prakrit

works like Sattasai of Hala, Brihatkatha of Gunadhya, and Terigatha, belonging to the

Buddhists cannon show that they were composed after the style of Sanskrit ornate poetry.

Thus there was no need for a ‘period’ to be called ‘Golden age’ and for ‘the highest

peak’ of ornate court poetry. Sanskrit literature was continuously cultivated in the earlier

centuries and attained a status of a standard that can be followed by others well before

Ashwaghosa.

Regarding the renaissance of Hinduism during the Gupta period, it is to be

remembered that the age of Sungas played an important role in the reviving Hinduism after

the advent and triumph of Buddhism and Jainasm under the rule of Mauryas. All the forgotten

sacrifices like Aswvamedha were revived. Brahminical institutions were maintained and

safeguarded. Sanskrit was given importance and made official language. Various

commentaries on different texts were composed. Popular individual worship of trinity of

Hinduism came into vogue during this period. The epics Bharata and the Ramayana were

enlarged and became more popular with priests and masses as well. Recitations of the epics

were arranged in courtyards of temples and scholars who gave recitals were maintained by

the grants of the kings. Thus everything that was connected with Hinduism was established

during this age and there were nothing new that could come up during the Gupta age.

Thus the prop up ‘Golden age’ is just another wishful hypotheses like Max Muller’s

‘dark age of Indian Literature’ and Ferguson’s Korur theory. Thus the theory of Golden age of

Guptas is bound to fail.

At least there is a tradition in support of the theory that Kalidasa was a court poet of

Vikramaditya of Ujjain. On the other hand there is no tradition at all in favour of Guptas of

Pataliputra as the patrons of Kalidasa. As a matter of fact there is doubt about the ‘real’

greatness of the Gupta kings. If indeed the Guptas were great patrons of literature, then

some of their names must have been lingering in the annals of tradition and literature as that

of Vikramaditya, Kanishka, Harsha and Bhoja. Guptas were completely unknown to Indian

Literature. On the other hand, there is a tradition130 against the Gupta kings, which says that

43

the kings of the Gupta dynasty were so cruel that the people were happy at the extinction of

their rule that they joyfully started the Vallabhi era or Gupta era in 319 A.D.

The three names viz., Candragupta, Vikramaditya and Kalidasa had already become

the common names during the age of Guptas. That is how two Gupta emperors had

Candragupta as their name and three emperors had Vikramaditya as titles, and one obscure

poet, south of Vindhya had the name of Kalidasa131. As Guptas had the name of Candragupta

aftrer the famous Maurya, so also they had the title Vikramaditya after the renouned Indian

Robinhood. By this time, Kalidasa was so well known that children were named as Kalidasa

or Navakalidasa or Kumarakalidasa or Parimalakalidasa etc., Poets were not only willing to

be influenced by him but were not ashamed to imitate him closely132. They used to call

themselves after the prince of Indian Poets. Thus the popularity of these three names and

especially that of Kalidasa during the 5th century would tell us that Vikramaditya and Kalidasa

were of ancient times and that they could not belong to the age of Guptas.

Scholar after scholar133 has maintained that Kalidasa revealed his Gupta patron in the

works Vikramorvasiya, Raghuvamsa and Kumarasambhava. Having kept silent about the

Gupta patron in his dramas, where he had an occasion to refer to them in the Prastavanas

and Bharatavakyas, how and why he would stealthily and obliquely refer to them in his

works? Kalidasa indulges in a lengthy introduction in his Raghuvamsa yet he had nothing on

Guptas. How is he ready to compose a drama on a theme that took place six or seven

centuries ago and on a personality who was not so romantic and heroic Agnimitra? and yet

neglects the hot and current unique adventure of his patron Candragupta II, the adventure in

which Candragupta enters the enemy camp bravely and rescues the queen Dhruvadevi. This

adventure of Candragupta was so famous that Visakhadatta commemorates the incident in

his Devicandragupta, unfortunately lost to us even to this day. Later Bana also refers to this

adventure of Candragupta in his Harshacarita.

Therefore it is not convincing that Kalidasa has alluded to the Guptas in his works.

There is an argument that Kalidasa has referred in his different works to the horse sarcrifice

of Samudragupta and his Digvijaya, the invasion of Hunas and their defeat at the hands of

Skandagupta. He also refers to Pandyas ruling over Uragapura (Uraiyur!) It is absurd to think

that Kalidasa is referring to his contemporary history with the keenness of a historian. Keith

dismisses this historic sense on the part of Kalidasa when he says, “This imputes to Kalidasa

a desire to achieve historic realism quite out of keeping with his poetic aim. That Kalidasa

lived to see the Huna victories is most implausible”. When Kalidasa refers to the Digvijaya of

Raghu, he was just following the traditional accounts134 that were given in the Mahabharata,

the Ramayana, Brihatkatha. When Kalidasa mentions the Pandyas of Uraiyur, he was doing

so from the hearsay and memory and thus commits mistakes. Pandyas ruled south India with

Madhura as their capital. Cholas ruled from Uraiyur. Thus any way, half of the statement of

Kalidasa is wrong historically. If the patron of Kalidasa had really conquered the Pandyas or

44

the city Uraiyyur, Kalidasa would not have committed this blunder because it should be his

contemporary knowledge.

Kalidasa was a staunch believer of the unity of the trinity, with predilection for Siva.

His three dramas in their Nandis have prayers in praise of Siva. Raghuvamsa begins with the

famous invocation for Siva and Parvati. Apart from this, there are ample instances of

reference to Siva and his myths. Kumarasambhava is nothing but epic saga of Siva.

Meghaduta also has many references to the god Siva. But the emperors of Guptas were

declared Paramabhavatas, the great devotees of Lord Vishnu and called themselves as such

in their inscriptions135. How could Kalidasa, a great Saivaite, be patronised by the Bhagavata

Gupta kings?

Though here and there some scholars136 have cautioned us against rash

pronouncements on the date of Kalidasa, until sufficient material is available to judge up on,

the earliest scholars had declared the ‘real’ date of Kalidasa, as though arrived at and proved

on sufficient evidence. What was the extent of Sanskrit literature known in the middle of 19th

century? Yet Waber137, in 1852, declared without hesitation: “ Internal evidence, partly derived

from the language, partly connected with the phase of civilization presented to us (in the

works of Kalidasa), leads me to assign the composition of Kalidasa’s three dramas to a period

from the second to the fourth centuries of our era, the period of the Gupta princes,

Candragupta & co…” Vincent Smith138, in the first decade of 20th century announces his final

judgment, “ In my judgment it is now established that Kalidasa lived and wrote in the fifth

century, his literary activities extending over a long period, probably not less than thirty years.”

Such definite pronouncements139 coming from ‘the masters’ have numbed the minds of the

‘servile Indian Scholars’ on the one hand and on the other hand made the later western

scholars not to investigate the thoroughness of the evidence on which such ‘judgments’ were

passed.

When Waber wrote his History of Indian Literature in 1852, much of the literature

known to us today was not available. Even the history of India was in primitive stage. Just

then light was being shed on the reign of the Guptas. Nothing much was known about the

Guptas except scrappy information here and there. Waber had no literataure between the

dramas of Kalidasa and those of Bhavabhuti. “If Kalidasa was really of 1st century B.C., then

along period of 8 to 9 centuries separate him from Bhavabhuti. Yet the language, the form of

the dramas has not changed. This is not possible. The language and form ought to change

during that period.”140 This was the predicament of Waber. That is why he denounces the

Vikramaditya tradition and places Kalidasa in the age of Guptas, between 2nd and 4th

centuries. He thus places the Guptas before 4th century. That was the state of history in the

days of Waber. Yet he declared that his conclusions were based on ‘internal evidence’141,

partly on the language and partly on the phase of civilization. What was his knowledge of

Sanskrit of those times? How much did he know about the environment – political, social and

religious conditions- of the ages of Gupta? To what extent the analysis made in 1850s stands

45

good today? More over Waber had failed to note that the rules of language (grammar) and

dramaturgy (Natyasastra) had been framed thousands of years ago and yet there could be no

change worth mentioning in them, even to this day.

Even during these days, when it is difficult to come to conclusion on the basis of

language used in the works, how much more difficult it would be to assess the language from

the meagre specimens available 100 years back. It was common for the scholars142 to say

that the languages both Sanskrit and Prakrits, of Ashvaghosa and Bhasa are primitive,

rugged and that Kalidasa, more advanced. Prof. Suktankar was mot forceful when he said, “

The Prakrit argument is inconclusive and cannot by itself be safely made the basis of

chronology.” Merely because the language of Kalidasa is more refined than Asvaghosha,

must he be later than Asvhaghosha and must he belong to the court of Candragupta II? How

logical is the argument!

And then what about the ‘internal evidence’ derived from the phase of civilization

presented to us, in the compositions of Kalidasa that Waber speaks of? This civilization of

Kalidasa corresponds with, according to the professor, the period of the Gupta princes,

Candragupta & co “whose reigns correspond best to the legendary tradition of the glory of

Vikramaditya, and may perhaps be gathered upon it in one single focus.”

First let us have a glimpse of the society during the reign of Guptas. Fa-Hein143, the

Chinese traveller, comes to our help by giving a detailed picture of the middle country, ruled

by Guptas during the 5th century A.D. Fa-Hein says thus: “ The king in his administration

uses no corporal punishments; criminals are merely fined according to the gravity of the

offences. Even for a second attempt at rebellion, the punishment is only the loss of right

hand. …Through out the whole country no one kills any living thing, nor drinks wine, nor eats

onion or garlic…..In this country they do not keep pigs or fowls. There are no dealings in

cattle, no butcher’s shops or distilleries in their market places. Only the candalas go hunting,

and deal in fish.” Vincent Smith fully supports these remarks of Chinese traveller when he

says, “ Fa-Hein’s incidental observations taken as a whole indicate that the Gupta empire at

the beginning of 5th century was well governed. The government let the people to live their

own lives without needless interferences; was temperate in the repression of crime and

tolerant in matters of religion.” A.L. Bhasham144 also agrees with this description. He says, “

The Chinese traveller may have exaggerated, but his testimony at least suggest that

executions were rare.” This society of Guptas was aquite different from the society of

Mauryas. V.Smith145 has this to say; “ Those observations (of Fa-Hein) prove that a great

change had occurred in the manners of the people and the attitude of the government since

the times of Mauryas.” Thus by the time of Guptas, the orthodox Hindu society controlled

strictly and harshly by the canons of Manu and others had come under the great influence of

Buddhism and got reformed and became moderate in many ways.

But the society depicted by Kalidasa in his works is completely different from the one

of the Guptas. Abhijnanasakuntala and Vikramorvasiya mention death as the minimum

46

punishment for mere theft146 of a jewel. Dharmasastras of Manu, Bouddhayana, Apastamba,

Vasistha, Gautama and Narada say that death is the minimum punishmenta for stealilng.

Brihaspati, Yajnavalkya and Vyasa tone down this punishment.

During the times of Kalidasa, as mentioned in Abhijanasakuntala147, windows were

not entitled to inherit the property of their dead husbands. When a rich man dies issueless

leaving behind property, his assets go to the government by escheat. Manu, Apastambha,

Bauddhayana and Vasishta do not recognise the widow as heir to the property of her late

husband. The position of widow was improved gradually by Narada, who made a provision

for her maintenance, by Gautama, who gave a share in the property, by Brihaspati who gave

her half share in the property of her husband. Sankhalikhita, Yajnavalkya and Vyasa also

admit the right of inheritance of the widow.

Kalidasa148 describes the free use of wine and meat not only among the common

man but also among the high-class people like Brahmins and kings and queens. During the

times of Kalidasa hunting was not condemned but considered only as a vyasana149. Kalidasa

himself praises hunting more than once. “Thus Kalidasa’s perfect acquaintance with laws,

customs, manners, arts, the schools of philosophy and sciences of his days are seen through

out his works.”150 Therefore the society of Kalidasa was materially different from that of the

Guptas.

Regarding the political conditions of the times of Kalidasa, the kingdoms of Malwa,

Magadha, Anupas, and Vatsabhumi were independent and self-governed. But the Malwa

provinces were under the rule of Western satraps since the times of Kushanas. Earlier

Sakasatraps ruled the Malwa provinces after subduing the tribal republics. The conditions

prevailing in Malwas were one of chaos. Peace was not reigning in that province for more

than three centuries. It was only during the times of Samudragupta that Eastern Malwa was

brought under his rule. Candragupta II annexed the western Malwa towards the end of the 4th

century after a long drawn war for more than twenty years. But Kalidasa’s works reveal a

period of peace and prosperity. Vincent Smith151 says, “ Good reason has been shown for

believing that Kalidasa was a native of Mandasor in Malwa or some place in the immediate

neighbourhood of that once famous town. He was brought up in close touch with the court of

Ujjaini and the active commercial and intellectual life which centred in that capital of Western

India.” This is the opinion supported by majority of scholars152.

Thus the internal evidence as seen in the works of Kalidasa has shown us that he

could not have lived in the age of Guptas and that Candragupta II or any Gupta emperor

could not be his patron whom the tradition eulogised as Vikramaditya.

Associated with the theory of Gupta’s age for the date of Kalidasa, there is the theory

that Buddhist poet and philosopher Asvaghosha was prior to Kalidasa. With out the

knowledge of existence of Asvaghosha, Waber had placed Kalidasa in between 2nd and 4th

centuries A.D. The discovery of the epics and dramas of Asvaghosha, and the tradition that

Asvaghosha was in the court of Kushana Emperor Kanishka (whose probable date ranging

47

from the end of 1st to 3rd centuries A.D.) made many modern scholars to declare that

Kalidasa was very much influenced by Asvaghosha’s works. Max Muller, Cowell, Johnston,

Keith, Bhandarkar and V.V.Mirasi recognised close parallels between the works of Kalidasa

and Asvaghosha. Prof. Gopal Raghunath Nandargikar, in his edition of Raghuvamsa, gave a

large number of parallels, almost running to 30 pages, and that too only from the

Buddhacarita. Saundarananda also furnishes a great variety of parallels. “ More instances of

this type can also be cited. The close similarity, not only in ideas but also in expression, in

such cases leaves little room for doubt that one of them must have been suggested by the

other. It is, however, difficult to decide who is the borrower... Unless we find some objective

proof of borrowing by one or the other, this cannot be decided convincingly.”153 At the same

time, all the scholars also recognised Asvaghosha’s poetry to be primitive, rough and

barbaric. Yet they did not hesitate to conclude that it was Kalidasa who imitates Asvaghosha.

Prof. Cowell154 says, “ I can hardly doubt that Kalidasa’s finished picture was suggested by

the rough, but vigorous out lines in Aswaghosha.” E.H. Johnston155 estimates Asvaghosha as

follows, “ This analysis of Asvaghosha’s technique suggests, that if we call him rough, the

Ennius to Kalidasa’s Vergil, we do not quite find the centre of the target; for where

Asvaghosha’s text survives undamaged, he is polished enough and his work is usually highly

wrought and well finished. But his intricacy and elaboration are those of the primitive, not of

the sophisticated writer; not for him the subtle relations of Kalidasa’s verse or its exact

harmonies of tone, still less the ‘slickness’ of later kavyas…. The correct view, I would

maintain then, is that Ashwaghosa is primitive in his art, just as he is in religion and

philosophy.”

Though Asvaghosha’s style is rough and primitive and though Buddhacarita, “ whose

effect is often marred by repetitions of the same words or phrases or even of a whole pada, in

a way that the kavis of the classical age sedulously avoided” is almost unknown in classical

age, western scholars assigned Asvaghosha to the early stages of Sanskrit literature. “ His

style proves him to have lived several centuries before Kalidasa; he is imitated by Bhasa, and

his vocabulary suggests a date not far removed from that of the Arthasastra of Kautilya.”156

Merely because Asvaghosha’s style is rough and primitive, can he be taken to the early

stages of classical literature?157 What is the solid evidence to propose such a sweeping

statement? Is not the entire argument centred on the assumption that Asvaghosha was a

contemporary of Kanishka? When the very date of Kanishka is a hot bed of contention and no

two scholars agree on this date, how to fix the date of Asvaghosha? It is a pity that the date of

kavikulaguru should depend on the uncertainty of the times of two kings who had nothing to

do with our poet. Can’t we divest Kalidasa and Asvaghosha from the relationship with their

supposed patrons and discuss their times independently?

If we forget, for a moment, totally the possibility that Asvaghosha had any connection

with Kanishka, then with out being vitiated by any bias, we come to the following conclusions:

48

1. Asvaghosa might be just another Vatsabhatti, Kumaradasa and score of other

poets who were deeply influenced by Kalidasa’s works. That is why there are innumerable

instances of parallelisms between Asvaghosha and Kalidasa. The scholars universally

acknowledged the fact of this close relationship between them.

2. As Asvaghosha’s compositions are rough and primitive in style, expression and

execution, no later poet bothered himself with his works. Added to this is his dependence on

the works of Kalidasa, the all-honoured prince of Indian poetry. In the dazzling radiance of the

glory of Kalidasa, Asvaghosha simply melted away. That is how the Indian rhetoricians were

totally ignorant about Asvaghosha. Even immediate successors of Kalidasa had no trace of

Asvaghosha’s influence on them. On the other hand all of them were profoundly indebted to

Kalidasa for their compositions; nay they survive because of him158. (If Asvaghosha

influenced Kalidasa himself, how was that Kumaradasa, Bhatti, Bharvi etc were not touched

by the influence of Asvaghosha.)

3. By his compositions Asvaghosha could not register his name in Indian literature or

in Buddhistic literature. Immediate successors159 of Kalidasa had shunned his works.

Buddhists also generally ignored his compositions. Fa-Hein is silent about Asvaghosha and

his works. It suggests that Asvaghosha was later to Fa-Hein. Heuin Tsang spoke of

Asvaghosha merely as a magician. I-Tsing spoke of Buddhacarita in such a manner that

Johnston160 himself felt that I-Tsing must have had a wrong title to quote. Thus Asvaghosha

had fallen between two stools.

4. There is no fundamental difference between their styles. Theirs is a simple style.

Both have the same predilections for word play--figures of speech of sound and sense. The

only difference between them is that Kalidasa’s style is graceful with evenness, while that of

Asvaghosha is rough, uneven and monotonous with frequent repetitions.

Thus there is no room for doubt about the superiority of Kalidasa over Asvaghosha. It

is clear that one of them must have been influenced by the other. But how to know who is the

original and who is the plagiarist? What objective proof are there to show the borrowings by

one from the other?

We have only to compare RV.VII, 11 and B.C.II, 19 to find out who is the original poet

and who is the plagiarist. Besides, Asvaghosha himself indicates who is the earlier of the two

when he says the following:

ºÉÉä%ÊxɝɪÉzÉÊ{É ªÉªÉÉè xÉ iɺlÉÉè*

iÉ®ÆúºiÉ®ÆúMÉäι´É´É ®úÉVɽÆþºÉ&** S.N. IV.42

¨ÉÉMÉÉÇSÉ™ô´ªÉÊiÉEò®úÉEÖòÊ™ôiÉä´É ʺÉxvÉÖ&*

¶Éè™ôÉÊvÉ®úÉVÉiÉxɪÉÉ xÉ ªÉªÉÉè xÉ iɺlÉÉè** K.S. V.85

Both the verses use the phrase na yayau na tasthau. While Kalidasa uses the phrase

to signify akulata, agitation, confusion in a idiomatic way, Asvaghosha uses it in a matter of

49

fact literary way missing the idiom, to mean oscillation, to and fro movement, aniscita,

indecision. Again we have

½þiÉÎi´É¹ÉÉä%xªÉÉ& ʶÉÊlÉ™ôÉƺɤÉɽþ´É&

ÊÛɪÉÉä ʴɹÉÉnäùxÉ Ê´ÉSÉäiÉxÉÉ <´É*

xÉ SÉÖGÖò¶ÉÖxÉÉǸÉÖ VɽÖþxÉÇ ¶É·ÉºÉÖ&

xÉ SÉä™Öô®úɺÉÖÌ™ôÊJÉiÉÉ <´É κlÉiÉÉ&** B.C. VIII.25

+Ê®úŸõ¶ÉªªÉÉÆ {ÉÊ®úiÉÉä ʴɺÉÉÊ®úhÉÉ

ºÉÖVÉx¨ÉxɺiɺªÉ ÊxÉVÉäxÉ iÉäVɺÉÉ*

ÊxɶÉÒlÉnùÒ{ÉÉ& ºÉ½þºÉÉ ½þiÉÎi´É¹ÉÉä

¤É¦ÉÚ´ÉÖ®úÉ™äôJªÉºÉ¨ÉÌ{ÉiÉÉ <´É** R.V. III.15

Johnston161 says that Kalidasa seems to criticize Asvaghosha for using the word

hatatvishah as an epithet for women. Kalidasa himself uses the word as an epithet of lamps.

It is natural and apt to use the word along with the lamps. But the word when applied for

women appears verbose and bombastic. More than the word hatatvishah, it is the spirit of the

situation that is important. Both the verses speak about the ‘still life’, that is, the appearance

of the pale women and the dull lamps as though painted in a picture. This ‘still life’ is felt in

Kalidasa’s verse where as it is missing in the catalogue of actions of Asvaghosha. It is

interesting to note that idea of ‘still life’ is favourite idea with Kalidasa as he depicts it again

and again, Viz., R.V. II, 31 and K.S.III, 35. Under these conditions, it is absurd to say that

Kalidasa was influenced by the word hatatvishah of Asvaghosha. It must be Asvaghosha

who, as usual with him, was attracted by Kalidasa’s depiction of ‘still life’ and had copied the

idea. The crudeness of the imitator can be felt on the tongue and the ear of the reader.

´ÉÉiÉɪÉxÉ䦪ɺiÉÖ Ê´ÉÊxÉ&ºÉÞiÉÉÊxÉ

{É®úº{É®úɪÉÉʺÉiÉEÖòhb÷™ôÉÊxÉ*

ÛÉÒhÉÉÆ Ê´É®äúVÉÖ¨ÉÖÇJÉ{ÉÆEòVÉÉÊxÉ

ºÉHòÉÊxÉ ½þ¨ªÉæι´É´É {ÉÆEòVÉÉÊxÉ** B.C.III.19

´ÉÉiÉɪÉxÉÉxÉɨÉʴɶÉÉ™ô¦ÉÉ´ÉÉ

nùxªÉÉäxªÉMÉhb÷ÉÌ{ÉiÉEÖòhb÷™ôÉxÉɨÉÂ*

¨ÉÖJÉÉÊxÉ ®äúVÉÖ& |ɨÉnùÉäkɨÉÉxÉÉÆ

¤ÉrùÉ& Eò™ôÉ{ÉÉ <´É {ÉÆEòVÉÉxÉɨÉÂ** B.C.III.21

iÉɺÉÉÆ ¨ÉÖJÉè®úºÉ´ÉMÉxvÉMɦÉê

´ªÉÉ”ÉÉxiÉ®ú& ºÉÉxpùEÖòiÉÚ½þ™ôÉxÉɨÉÂ*

Ê´É™ôÉä™ôxÉäjɧɨɮèúMÉÇ´ÉÉIÉÉ&

ºÉ½þ»É{ÉjÉɦɮúhÉÉ <´ÉɺÉxÉÂ** K.S.VII.62

Prof. Cowell162 says that Kalidasa had directly taken the verse of Asvaghosha and

turned the crude sketch into a more finished picture. Here it is to be noted that R.V. VII.11 is

50

repeated by Kalidasa in his Kumarasambhava at K.S. VII.62. It is inconceivable that a poet

considers unique a verse of his, which was the product of imitation and uses it in Toto in two

of his works! “If Kalidasa were the debtor, he would not have repeated the entire description

in the same words in two of his works, there by himself parading the stolen goods. The

orderly development of appropriate ideas, the melodious phrasing and embodied imagery that

we find in Kalidasa is entirely lacking in Ashwaghosa. The latter’s description is only

patchwork poetry. His poetic poverty is such that he repeats the same words and ideas twice

in this short passage.”163 Viz., verses B.C. III, 19 and 21. Incidentally, Johnston doubts the

authenticity of B.C. III.21.

Once again, we have

näù´ÉÉä%Ê{É ¶É¨¦ÉÖ& SÉÊ™ôiÉÉä ¤É¦ÉÚ´É * B.C.XIII.16

½þºiÉÖ ÊEòʈÉiÉ {ÉÊ™ô™Öô”ÉvÉèªÉÇ&* K.S.III.67

Asvaghosha turns the confession of Kalidasa regarding Siva’s unsteadiness into a

eulogy of his Lord Buddha. Kalidasa says that when Kama discharged the arrow on Siva, He,

for a moment, lost his balance of mind, but composed himself immediately. Asvaghosha picks

up the same statement of Kalidasa and proclaims that even the great god Sambhu was

disturbed but his Lord could neither be influenced nor lost his steadiness164. Thus

Asvaghosha had a dig at Kalidasa while making use of latter’s vocabulary. It is like poking

Kalidasa’s eye with his own finger!

Finally, we see

vÉxªÉɺªÉ ¦ÉɪÉæÊiÉ ¶ÉxÉè®ú´ÉÉäSÉxÉÂ*

¶ÉÖrèù¨ÉÇxÉÉäʦÉ& JÉ™Öô xÉÉxªÉ¦ÉÉ´ÉÉiÉÂ* B.C.III.23

ªÉÉ nùɺªÉ¨É{ªÉºªÉ ™ô¦ÉäiÉ xÉÉ®úÒ

ºÉÉ ºªÉÉiÉ EÞòiÉÉlÉÉÇ ÊEò¨ÉÖiÉÉÆEò¶ÉªªÉɨÉÂ* K.S.VII.65

Asvaghosha says that the ladies looking at Gautama Siddartha, exclaimed with pure

minds alone and not with any motive, that his wife was lucky to have him as husband. Here

Asvaghosha seems accusing Kalidasa who said that even a slave woman of Shiva is more

lucky, what then of her who should attain his lap? Thus Asvaghosha reveales his

indebtedness to Kalidasa.

Various references165 to Kanva, Dausyanta, Bharata, Sakuntaleya, Pururavas, Yayati,

Gautama, Raghu etc., made by Asvaghosha in his works reveal his intimacy with the

compositions of Kalidasa, as the personalities mentioned above have been particularly

immortalised by Kalidasa. But for Kalidasa’s resurrection, these names woud have remained

buried under the weight of moth-eaten, dust-laid Puranas along with scores of other names.

Prururava’s madness was the innovation of Kalidasa just as the Durvasa’s curse. No other

purana or epic has this incident. Yet Asvaghosha166 refers this madness unmada in his

Saundarananda. This statement itself is a clear proof of Asvaghosha’s lateness.

51

Kalidasa’s models in poetry were the great Valmiki, Bhasa, Saumilla and Kaviputra.

He was not shy to acknowledge his indebtedness to them. But nowhere he mentioned the

name of Asvaghosha, because he could not have been influenced by Asvaghosha’s barbaric,

primitive and rough poetry. If indeed Kalildasa knew Asvaghosha’s works and was really

influenced by them, he would have mentioned Asvaghosha even though he was a Buddhist.

As seen from Malavikagnimitra167, Kalidasa had great respect and honour for Buddhists.

Thus the silence of Kalidasa regarding he name of Asvaghosha while mentioning the names

of Bhasa, Saumilla and Kaviputra is an undeniable proof of Kalidasa’s priority. Generally the

argument of ex silentio is not a conclusive proof. But under the present circumstances when

Kalidasa mentioned some of his elders and omitted the name of Asvaghosha, the silence is a

telling proof of Asvaghosha’s lateness that nobody can brush it aside. Kalidasa is silent about

his personal history in his works; while the later poets like Bana, Sriharsha etc give their

personal information in their works. So also Asvaghosha gives ample information about

himself. Thus, he reveals his lateness.

In the light of above objective proofs, we are reasonably certain that Kalidasa really

came earlier to Asvaghosha and that Ashvaghosha unhesitatingly borrowed from Kalidasa

with both hands, just as he did from Valmiki, Vedavyasa and Bhasa. He need not feel

compunction. He was not writing for name and fame. Nor he was addressing the elite

Hindus. His aim168 was not to entertain the scholars but to further the attainment of salvation

among the common masses who were given over to the pleasures of the senses and averse

to moral life and purity and salvation. He was propagating the True Law in accordance with

the laws of Kavya poetry so as to make it palatable.

The argument regarding the Prakrits of Asvaghosha, his primitiveness of the poetry

signifying his earlier and primitive stages of Sanskrit literature, do not really hit the point

concerning the date of Kalidasa. Prof. Suktankar169, discussing the relevance of Prakrits says,

“ The Prakrit argument is inconclusive and cannot by itself be safely made the basis of

chronology.” The entire force of Johnston’s justification of Asvaghosha’s primitiveness rests

merely on the supposition that he was earlier to Kalidasa. With the demolition of that

hypothesis, the entire mansion of early stages of literature painfully and carefully built by the

professor, crumbles down into dust.

The disappearance of Asvaghosha’s compositions from the world of Sanskrit poetry

and from the land of the birth of Buddha can be traced to the disgust the kavis170 have for

plagiarists and plagiarism. Is it not a fact that the twinkling stars that shine due to borrowed

light vanish in the bright day light?

Having disposed off the Gupta’s Golden age for the existence of Kalidasa and having

established Asvaghosha as one who imitated Kalidasa closely, we have, now to place

Kalidasa in an earlier age preceding Christian era.

Tradition placed Kalidasa in the court of Vikramaditya who ruled Malvas from city Ujjain.

Different authorities gave Vikramaditya different titles viz., Sakari, Sahasanka and

52

Sakakartha. He was believed to have founded the Vikrama era in 58 B.C., Various ancient

works like Gathasaptasati, Brihatkatha (in different adaptations), Rajatarangini, Patavalis and

Teravalis of Merutungacarys and narratives of Kalakacarya kathanaks mention Vikramaditya

of Ujjain as different and distinct from Vikramaditya of Magadha.

The traditions about Vikramaditya fall in to two distinct classes, legendary and historical.

Traditions as found in works like Bhetalapancavinsati and Simhasanadwatrinsaka and

Bhojaprabandha etc have no historical value beyond proving that Vikramaditya was regarded

as an exemplary king long after his death. Historical traditions that are contained in standard

works of Jains like the Theravalis of Merutungacarya (14th century A.D.) etc, and in narratives

connected with the history of the Jaina religion like kathanaka of Kalakacarya etc are of

probative value.

The account of Vikramaditya of Ujjain according to Teravali of Merutungacarya and

Kalikacaryakathanaka is as follows:

Kalakacarya, a famous Jainaguru, had a sister. King Gardhabhilla of Ujjaini had molested

her. Enraged at the incident, Kalakacarya had invited the Sakas to invade the kingdom of

Gardhabhilla. Accordingly, the sakas marched in to Ujjain, uprooted Gardhabhilla and

established Saka rule in the Malva province. Four years after the occupation of Ujjain by

Sakas, Vikramaditya, the son of deposed Gardhabhilla, regained his kingdom by evicting the

Sakas and established an era. This incident took place 470 years after the starting of Vira era,

corresponding to 56 B.C. the starting of Vikrama Samvat. Vikrama had ruled for sixty years

followed by his son Vikramacarita who ruled for forty years. Next three successors had ruled

for 11, 14 and 10 years successively. Saka(samvatsara) era then came in to vogue, 605

years after Viranirvana. This termination of rule of the successors of Vikrama corresponds to

78 A.D. i.e., the starting of Salivahana saka.

There is nothing in this account, which, on the face of it, appears to be absurd or even

unworthy of belief. We cannot suspect any motive on the part of Jains in extolling

Vikramaditya171. On the other hand, the Jaina traditions give a definite historical setting to

king Vikramaditya of Ujjain. He flourished during the period following the dissolution of the

Maurya empire when the Satavahana family was ruling in the Deccan and the sakas were

knocking at the gates of India, but thanks to Vikramadity’s valour and prowess, could not

permanently establish themselves on this side of the Indus. “Instead of holding up this or that

king of a later date as the source of all these traditions, one should rather try to find out

whether the main elements of this tradition, so consistently kept within this proper historical

setting, are opposed to any known facts of history or are confirmed by any independent

evidence.”172

So far as the history of the period is known to us, the traditional account of Vikramaditya,

as given above, does not militate against any known fact. Malwas were well known for their

valour and their tribal republics from the times even before of Maurya dynasty. They were

mentioned by Panini (500 B.C.) and Mahabharata (400 B.C.). When Alexander invaded India

53

in 326 B.C., they resisted his army tooth and nail and laid their lives in thousands. At that time

they were on the borders of India. In course of time, they had moved down to Katheawad and

Gujarath got established in the Malwa province of today. The story of Saka invasion is born

out by the fact that Castana, the first of a long line of Saka Satraps ruling Western India, had

his capital at Ujjaini and certainly flourished about the time when the Sakas were presented in

the Jaina literature. The Malwas came into conflict with Ushavadata, the son-in-law of

Nahapana and subjugated by him with the help of his allies. From then onwards, the Malwas

came under the reign of the Western Satraps. The Malwa copper coins are found all over the

wide area from Sutlej to the Narmada and have an equally wide range in time from 250 B.C.

to 350 A.D. Their coins dated after 350 A.D. could not be found as they ceased to be

independent and were subjugated by and submitted to the power of Guptas under

Samudragupta. Thus Malwas had a glorious and long reign of democratic republic.

As regards confirmation of the Jaina traditions, the earliest reference to Vikramadity occur

in Hala’s Saptasati (5.64) and Brihatkatha of Gunadhya (as per its different adaptations). Both

the works are generally assigned to the first century A.D. Many later works also support the

above traditions. “It would, therefore, be unreasonable to reject an old historical tradition and

assume the non-existence of a king Vikramaditya simply because his coins or inscriptions

have not come to light. We should not, of course, definitely regard Vikramaditya as an

historical person until more positive evidence is available, but it would be more reasonable to

accept the existence of this king as a provisional hypothesis, like that of many kings whose

names are known from the Puranas or Buddhist literature alone, than dogmatically to assert

the contrary.”173 In fact, it is for the scholars who question the tradition to disprove it with

reasonable explanations. Until then, it is hoped that any one who discusses the question in

an unbiased spirit, and on the principle so well stated by Oldenberg, will accept the main

elements of the Jaina tradition about Vikramaditya as a provisional hypothesis. “ In any case,

it is time that the hunting for the king Vikramaditya of tradition among the crowed heads of

ancient India must definitely come to an end.”174

Thus, though Prof. Waber and Vincent Smith unequivocally declared that Kalidasa

belonged to the age of Guptas, the ground reality is that, as long as Kalidasa is associated

with Vikramaditya, we cannot come to any definite conclusion. Prof. A.K. Warder, who is the

latest to discuss the date of Kalidasa has this to say: “Tentatively we can do no better than

place Kalidasa in the middle of the 5th century A.D.”175 It is to be noted that until now, dating

Kalidasa was proceeding in a vicious circle. Kalidasa’s date is justified with reference to the

golden age of Gupta’s which concept itself is based primarily on the compositions of Kalidasa

and Bhasa and others, whose times are far from settled. It is high time that we seek an

alternative theory for the date of Kalidasa without any leaning on king Vikramaditya or

Gupta kings176.

Why did Kalidasa compose a historical play, that too his maiden venture on Agnimitra

Sunga, a lesser known king who lived 500 years earlier, if indeed Kalidasa had lived in about

54

5th century A.D,? Why did he not choose the socalled famous Candragupta II as a hero in one

of his plays? Kalidasa, in the Bharatavakya of Malavikagnimitra, refers to the king Agnimitra

Sunga. “Now it is generally agreed that the king named in the Bharatavakya is usually the one

during whose reign the particular play was first staged.”177 Thus, there is good reason to

suppose that Kalidasa wrote his works during the reign of Agnimitra or at least

immediately following him. Evidence from different angles-- the historical material

presented in Malavikagnimita, the historical setting of the age following the fall of

Maurya empire, the social, cultural and religious conditions of the Sunga period and

the state of Sanskrit literature preceding the Christian era etc., point to the fact that

Kalidasa should have belonged to the age of the Sungas. Unfortunately, this line of

documentation is not considered seriously, as scholar after scholar was dazed by the glamour

and radiance of Vikramaditya whose identity is a matter of dispute and lost sight of the simple

and straightforward solution. Let us see how far we can proceed on this line of argument.

The play Malavikagnimitra throws a lot of light on the history of Sunga kings. Various

Puranas and inscriptions and coins of the age support the information obtained from the work.

The play not only mentions Agnimitra in its Bharatavakya, but in its entirety is a saga of his

adventures in the realm of romance. Agnimitra was not a youth. He had a grown up son who

led the imperial army victorious against the Yavana invaders. Agnimitra was of middle age

with two senior queens rivalling with each other for his love. He was a mere royal

representative--not even a crown prince-- of his aged warrior-father Senapati Pushyamitra,

who was the de facto emperor of Magadha. In this drama, Agnimitra was not a martial hero

but is of romance. While the emperor-father was performing horse sacrifice, he cared not to

attend the sacrifice. When his own son was leading the army to protect the horse, he allowed

himself in palatial extra marital romance with a young maiden who actually could be a bride

for his son, Vasumitra. He was not intelligent, plain and bold. He had no shame or dignity; he

stoops to any level to save himself on the occasion. He was afraid of his senior queens but

could not control his passion for young women. However, in his middle age, he had an eye

and heart for romance with one far younger in age. Yet he, on his own, could not design any

strategy to win her love. He, like, a babe, slavishly depended much on the craftiness of the

fool who played the kingpin in the play. Even in executing the plan of the others he would

falter and used to be caught red handed in his love affairs. Finding no alternatives, he would

shamelessly fall at the feet of his queens. Thus, he is un-magnanimous and unromantic and

cannot be fit for the role of Dhirodatta nayaka of the play. Even a third-rate dramatist will not

make Agnimitra hero of a play. Yet Kalidasa had composed his maiden play around

Agnimitra. “At this distance in time, it is difficult to be sure of Kalidasa’s intention in this play.

Is he ironically presenting Agnimitra as a trifler, amusing himself with love intrigues whilst

others attend to the serious business of life and the state, dependent even in his amorous

undertakings on a resourceful jester; is this a criticism of unworthy kingship? Or are we rather

to admire the policy of Agnimitra in securing such a life for himself”178.

55

In the light of above analysis, it is reasonable to infer that Kalidasa, at the time of

composing this play, must be a budding dramatist, living in the reign of Agnimitra. He, in his

enthusiasm to compose his maiden work, took the ruler of his days, unmindful of Agnimitra’s

shortcomings, as the hero and tried his best to ennoble the character. The play reveals its

intimate knowledge with the history of the times. Pushyamitra was mentioned a senapati and

not as Maharaja. The viceroy-ship of Agnimitra at vidisa, the division of Vidarbha country in to

two kingdoms, the victory of the army of Pushayamitra against that of Yavanas on the

southern bank of Sindhu river on the boarders of India, the performance of Ashwamedha

sacrifice by Pushyamitra- and many more facts of history are referred to in the play. The

entire information of the play is independently attested to by the accounts of the puranas,

inscriptions and coins.

Kalidasa’s compositions reveal that during his times there was no paramount power,

which brought most of India under its suzerainty. Though Maghadha kingdom was still

important, it lost hold on most of the country; many provinces had declared their

independence from the Maghadha Empire. Kalidasa mentions Vidarbha, Avanthis, Dasarnas,

Anupas, Saurashtra, Angas, Kalinga as independent kingdoms. On the north-west frontier,

Kalidasa refers to four foreign races as reigning. They are the Parasikas (Perians), the

Yavanas (The Greeks), the Huns and the Kambojas (the Kabulis).

This condition of India tallies with the picture of the country at the close of the

Mauryan Empire. As soon as Pushyamitra occupied the seat of Pataliputra, King of Vidarbha

declared his independence. Thus river Narmada was the southern boundary of the Sungas. In

the south east, Kalinga had probably become already independent, and the Sunga

supremacy stopped at its boundary. The coins discovered at Mathura, Pancala, Avadh and

other localities in U.P. show that local rulings dynasties flourished there in the post-Maurya

period. “If we dismiss from our mind the cobwebs of theories that have gathered round the

Indo-Greek, Parthain data to support them, we may postulate a rational view about the

political condition of India after the fall of Maurya Empire. It would appear that so long as

Pusyamitra was alive, he was able to maintain, to a large extent, the Magadhan Empire in

Northern India, established by the Nandas and Maurya. Though the Greeks appeared in the

North West frontier, it was successfully defended in spite of their occasional raids. Pusyamitra

signalised the revival of brahmanical religion and the establishment of his authority over the

Maurya Empire by celebrating two ashwamedha sacrifices.

“But some time after his death, the empire showed the same signs of decay as we

find in the case of every empire in India (from the Guptas down to the Mughals). Local chiefs

or governors gradually asserted their authority and began to assume real or virtual

independence. But, as the case of Ayodya shows, the supremacy of Pushyamitra (and his

successors) was acknowledged for some time even after his death. The end of the nominal

suzerainty of the Sungas was probably brought about by a joint invasion of the rulers of

Mathura and Pancala aided by Greek forces; either mercenary troops, or led by a Greek king.

56

Avadh, which loyally stood by the Sungas, was overrun and the allies probably advanced as

far as Pataliputra. Quarrels soon broke out among the heterogeneous forces and they

retired. Henceforth, North India showed the usual spectacle which followed the decline of a

mighty empire, namely a canneries of States corresponding to old traditional kingdoms of

Mathura, Pancala, Ayodhya; Magadha and a host of others. The beginning of this may be

roughly placed in the second half of the second century B.C.”

The conditions, social and cultural, as depicted in the works of Kalidasa have echoes

in the society of the Sungas. Various Dharma sastras and the Arthasastra and the edicts of

Ashoka and the impressions of Greek writers like Magastanese etc throw light on the

conditions of Maurya and post Maurya ages. Let us see how far the society of Mauryas tallies

with that of Kalidasa.

Position of women: The position of women seems, somewhat confusing. On one

hand she is praised179 as the glory of the home, the symbol of prosperity to the family, the

better half of the husband, his friend, philosopher and guide. Whereever women are

honoured180 there only gods like to dwell. Where the female relations live in grief, the family

where the women are happy ever prospers. On the other hand, women are denounced181 in

no mean words. They are described as fickle, quarrelsome, untruthful-in other words, a

veritable pot of poison: She must always remain under control182 all her life: in girlhood under

the care of her father, in youth under the domination of the husband, and in old age in the

charge of her sons. She is not entitled to any freedom. Manu183 expresses his sentiments

about women in a language, which is “most dishonourable and humiliating to the class as a

whole, and to which it is difficult to find a parallel in a book held in respect by a large section

of Humanity.”

Unenviable is the position of the father of an unmarried daughter. Fathers shudder at

the birth of daughters. “To all who desire honour, to be the father of a girl is a misery.”184

Anxiety is the lot of the father-anxiety as to her marriage. Anxiety as to her life in the

husband’s house, anxiety as to her future conducts. “The father of an unmarried girl though

equal to Indra, was subjected to insult from equals, inferiors and superiors.”185

Though Kalidasa had great respect for women, at the same time, he denounces them

as quick-witted186, cunning by nature187, and as “those who achieve their purpose by

ensnaring the folk with their honeyed falsehoods.”188 A woman is not free to give herself in

marriage, she must be offered by her guardians. Until her marriage, she is treated as a

burden, a pledge, deposit, that is to be returned back carefully. She is always a person who

brings grief to her people189. She is centre of suspicion of all the time. Women, who

transgress the rules and regulations of the strict society, are condemned as ‘ cancer of the

family’190. Kalidasa discourages191 love marriages of Gandhara type even among Kshatriyas

and warns the girls about the dangers of unions in private.

Right of inheritance of women: Manu is completely silent about the right of the widow

in the estate of her diseased husband. In the absence of male issues, the property of the

57

husband delves on to the government192 and a widow cannot claim anything. Yajnavalkya

gives an equal share as that of a son to the widow. In the absence of the sons the order of

succession is to be follows: the widow, the daughters, parents etc., In giving the widow a full

right to succeed after her dons, Yajynavalkya brings himself into line with the advanced ideas

of Brihaspati and Katyayana, unlike the narrow and orthodox views of Manu and Narada on

the subject193.

Kalidasa following Manu says that the property of the diseased leaving no heir (even

in the presence of the widow) goes to the king and the widow does not get anything.194

Tradition of Sati: Position regarding the Sati-widow burning is somewhat confusing.

Mahabharata records some cases of Sati. For ex. Madri and wives of Krishna burn

themselves. The Ramayana is totally silent about this. The testimony of the Greek writers

leaves no doubt on the point and the possibility of the prevalence of this practice in the

Punjab, if not elsewhere, is to be conceded195. It is possible that the practice was confined to

the warrior class only. It was voluntary choice. The practice is not sanctioned either by the

Dharma sutras or by the Smritis. Manu and Yajnavalkya are reticent about it, though Vishnu

deems to commend it in passages, which are regarded by many as later interpolation. The

practice, for the first time, is recommended by the later texts like Vaikhanasa Grihya-sutras

and the Smritis like Sankha, Angiras, Parasara and Vyasa196. Medhatithi, while commenting

on Manu. V, 157, takes opportunity to strongly object to the practice of widow burning197.

Kalidasa, at two places refers indirectly to the practice of sati. Rati, the wife Kama,

when her husband was reduced to ashes by the fire of Shiva, prepares to burn herself with

the ashes of her husband198 (K.S. 35, 36, 37). In Malvikagnimitra, parivrajaka says that she

opted for ochre robes after renewed pains of widowhood, signifying that the sati was not

compulsory.

Institution of courtesans: In India class courtesans enjoyed a social standing not

accorded to them anywhere else in the world. Festivities are not complete without their

presence. The great prestige accorded to them is attested to by the epics, Buddhistic texts

and Kautilya Arthasastra. The story of Amrapali reveals to what extent they can rise in the

society. Kautilye lays down rules in detail for the regulating the profession. We goes to the

extent of making a provision for a superintendent of prostitutes on a salary of 1,000 panas

together with a rival prostitute on half that salary. Vatsayana’s Kamasastra discusses in detail

the topics connected with the profession of courtesans.

Kalidasa in many places refers to the courtesans as coming on to the roads, singing

and dancing and spraying flowers and lajas. They are described as the favourite company of

the kings. They are mentioned as a must at sacrifices and festivities. Cities are described as

colourful with courtesans.

Female guards: Women not only received traditional training in sastras, philosophy,

music, dance and painting, but some of them also went for military training and services.

Patanjali refers to spear wielding women guarding the chambers of the kings. Megasthenese

58

refers to female Yavana bodyguards in attendance on Candragupta Maurya, when he went

out to hunt. “Of the women some are in chariots, some, on horses, and some even on

elephants and they are equipped with weapons of every kind, as if they were going on a

campaign.”199 Kautilya also refers to female bodyguards of the kings. “ The king, on getting up

from his bed, shall be received by troops of women armed with bows.”200 A women riding a

fully caparisoned horse and carrying a standard is depicted in one of the sculptures of

Bharhut.

Kalidasa in his dramas portrays his heroes always surrounded by beautiful, robust

weapon wielding Yavana women. They appear to follow the king round the clock unless they

are specifically sent away.

Food and drinks: Human society, universally, is a non-vegetarian one. Indian society

is not an exception. In Vedic times meat eating is so general that taking corn, seeds etc., are

specially mentioned. In spite of the growing spirit of non-violence due to the influence of the

Jains and Buddhists, and enforced by emperors like Ashoka, various kinds of fish and meat,

not excluding beef, were extensively taken by the people. Brahmanas also partook nonvegetarian

food. Even the ascetics were not strict vegetarians201. Though their main food

consisted of fruits and tubers, they did not abstain from meat eating as a principle of either

religious or social significance. The idea that “ a purely vegetarian diet is an indication of

spiritual progress and an advanced culture”202 is a later development in India. Sages,

generally, Agastya specially, are described as relishing the meat. There seems to have been

no ban on meat eating by Brahmanas even at the time of Bhavabhuti for he depicts Vasishta

as eating a tawny calf in his Uttararamacarita203. The Mahabharata mentions how the king

Rantideva used to kill everyday two thousand cattle and two thousand kine in order to feed

Brahmanas with meat delicacies. Emperor Ashoke even after his conversion to Buddhism,

continued to take non-vegetarian food. His Rock.Edict. I 204 records thus: “ now, when this

prescript on morality is written only three animals are killed daily for the sake of curry- two

peacocks and one deer, but even this deer not regularly.”205 It may be added that the same

edict ends with the promise, ‘Even these (animals) shall not be killed in future’; but there is no

record of this pious resolution having been carried out, and it is possible to maintain that until

the end of his days Ashoka remained a non-vegetarian. According to Kautilya206, the state

maintained the slaughterhouse and protected the forests for animals and birds.

Enjoying drinks were common among the people. Various kinds of wine were

mentioned in the texts. Kautilya gives a detailed description of their manufacture, which was

a state monopoly. The state controlled the sale and distribution of the liquors. Though

Megasthenese says that the Indians do not drink wine except at sacrifices, in actual practice it

is entirely a different story. Apart from Kautilya’s testimony, there is ample evidence to show

that the habit of drink was common, especially among Kshatariyas, the nobility and officers.

Kings like Rama, Krishna, Arjuna and Yadavas were known to enjoy drinks. Even women are

said to have consumed liquor in public207; Ramayana not only describes women under the

59

influence of wine but also in a verse in the Uttarakanda how Rama208 took Sita by the hand

and made her drink some wine. Hanuman appears to indicate that he would not have been

amazed to see Sita drunk if not for the fact that she was separated from Rama. Brahmanas

were generally prohibited from the drink. But they appear to have been no strict teetotallers,

as the Ramayana describes them in two similes as being utterly bewildered due to

intoxication and as accusing themselves. It is possible that the Brahmanas were usually

teetotallers and whenever they drink they became a source of much ridicule.

Kalidasa209 refers to slaughter houses and eagles flying over them. Mention is made

to the kind-heartedness210 of a shrotriya brahmana who is engaged in the killing of animals for

the sacrifice. He also refers to Brahmanas eating meat and to the cooking of meat on

campfires. He many a time refers to the use of wine. He mentions the stores of wines.

Friendships are strengthened on the cup of wine. Aristocratic women and queens211 enjoy

wine without restrain. As a matter of fact excessive intoxication is a unique ornament212 of

damsels. It is said that sugar candy matsyandika acts as antidote to the effects of liquor.

Hunting: Hunting happens to be the most important out-door recreation of the royalty.

Though Manu regards it as a vice capable of ruining a king, it is interesting to note that the

hunting continued to be the most popular diversion of the kings till much later times. Asoka

refers to it in his VIII Rock Edict. Rama, with his brothers, used to go hunting. The royalty took

part in hunt both for flesh and sport. It is justified on the count that it affords an opportunity in

training in archery. Many a times it is called an exercise in archery. Soldiers are encouraged

to take part in hunting as part of their training. Actually Kullukabhatta213, the commentator on

Manusmriti allows it because it ensure health through physical exercise.

Though acknowledging the hunting as a vice, never the less, Kalidasa has

commendation, for it. “False indeed do they call hunting, a vice; no recreation, surely, can be

compared with it. “214 It helps in toning up the body. It makes one concersant with the art of

hitting down the moving mark. It gives an opportunity to study the nature of the animals in the

states of fear and anger, solely as an exercise, Kalidasa permits hunting. After some time

hunting of elephants215 and such animals are prohibited.

Criminal law, punishment for theft: Various texts give different punishments for

different kinds of the &fts fines, amputation and capital punishments. But Manu lays down

capital punishment for the theft of men of noble family and especially women and the most

precious gems216. “In the times of Manu, Apastamba, Baudhayana, Vasistha, Gautama and

Narada the punishment for theft of gem was death. As the progress of civilization advanced,

so the means of protecting property increased and there was greater safety and security of

people’s property. Death was thus thought to be a very severe punishment by Brihaspati,

Yajnavalkya and Vysa.217” The option is between death, corporal punishments, fines etc.

Kalidasa clearly mentions that death is the only punishment for the theft of gem. In

Abhijnanasakuntala218, the fisherman is threatened with death for stealing Dushyanta’s royal

60

signet ring. In Vikramorvasiya219 also, when a bird steals a gem, the mention of death as

punishment is mentioned.

Thus, Kalidasa undeniably reveals his age as that of Sungas (the society that was

not different from those of Mauryas).

CONCLUSION

Having tried to identify and locate the hoary king Vikramadiytya, and having totally

disproved the theory of Golden age of Gupta’s and their possible connection with the famous

Kalidasa, we have succeeded in releasing the issue of Kalidasa’s date from the vicious circle

of guesses and fanciful hypotheses. We have also proved the fallacy of Asvaghosha’s

influence on Kalidasa and have declared that Asvaghosha indeed had shamelessly imitated

the prince of Indian Poets.

We have studiously gone through the entire gamut of the relationship of Raghuvamsa

with the Ramayana and cogently argued that Raghuvamsa of Kalidasa has moulded the

growth of the Ramayana from the original three-kanda work. The genius Kalidasa became the

pole star in directing the rise of to the compositions of both the Balakanda and the

Uttarakandas. But for Raghuvamsa, these two later additions to the Ramayana could

not have been composed. Thus Kalidasa was earlier to these kandas.

We have discussed the periods of Sungas and Kalidasa from many angles and

proved that Kalidasa must belong to the age of Sungas. At every stage, facts and proofs are

carefully weighed and considered objectively. We hope that the world of scholars will

appreciate this unique attempt of research in the field of the Ramayana and Kalidasa.

+É{ÉÊ®úiÉÉä¹ÉÉÊuùnÖù¹ÉÉÆ xÉ ºÉÉvÉÖ ¨ÉxªÉä |ɪÉÉäMÉÊ´ÉYÉÉxɨÉÂ*

¤É™ô´ÉnùÊ{É Ê¶ÉÊIÉiÉÉxÉɨÉÉi¨ÉxªÉ|ÉiªÉªÉÆ SÉäiÉ&**

* * * * *

61

APPENDIX I

THE CASE OF THREE INSCRIPTIONS

Date of Kalidasa is inexclicably connected with three Inscriptions of Aihole,

Mandasor and Pattan copper plates. For long a time, Aihole was the earliest and the

only inscription that named the Prince of Indian Poets, Kalidasa. Next came the

inscription of Mandasor, which threw light on the influence of Kalidasa on its

composer. Thus the Mandasor gave the upper limit of the period of Kalidasa. Finally

it is the inscription of Pattan copper plates that help us in finalizing the date of

Kalidasa. These copper plates once again mention the name of Kalidasa. The

conclusions derived from these inscriptions assign the date of Kalidasa beyond any

trace of doubt.

AIHOLE INSCRIPTION of PULAKESIN II

This inscription is dated Saka Samvat 556 corresponding to 634 A.D. It is in

the form of eulogy of exploits of the great Pulakesin II of Badami Calukya dynasty.

This inscription was composed by Ravikirthi in chaste Vaidarbhi style in verses and is

engraved on the stone wall of a Jaina temple called Meguti. Ravikirthi, the author of

this inscription claims by composing this, to amass the combined name and fame of

both Kalidasa and Bharavi. “ Important as this inscription is as an historical

document, it seems almost more interesting from a literary point of view….It raises its

author to the level of Kalidasa and Bharavi, surely an exaggeration, but in my opinion

this indubitably placaes hin in the very front rank of court poets and writers of

prasastis.” (F.Kielhorn, Epigraphia Indica Vol. VI pp.3)

ºÉ Ê´ÉVɪÉiÉÉÆ ®úÊ´ÉEòÒÌiÉ& , EòÊ´ÉiÉÉʸÉiÉ EòÉʳýnùÉºÉ ¦ÉÉ®úÊ´É EòÒÌiÉ&*

Thus Ravikirthi proves the existence of the great Kalidasa by his times. “…for

the principal part of his poem, the description of the exploits of his patron, Ravikirthi

clearly has taken his model the Raghu”s digvijayam from Raghuvamsa IV”. If

Kalidasa and Bharavi had attained so much fame by 634 A.D., then at least one or two

centuries must have elapsed from the times of both of these poets and times of

Ravikirthi. Thus Kalidasa might have lived around 450 A.D.

MANDASOR INSCRIPTION OF KUMARAGUPTA:

This is dated in 473-74 A.D. It was discovered in the Sun temple in Mandasor

district of the state of Madhya Pradesh. Vatsabhatti, an officer in charge of building a

temple to Sund God, composed this inscription. It was consists of 42 verses.

Vatsabhatti knew his capacity and admits that he composed the inscription with great

care and effort. Sanskrit Scholars have clearly seen the influence of Meghaduta and

Ritusamhara on the ideas of Vatsabhatti. Biihler has this to say about Vatsabhatti.

“Vatsabhatti was not at all a man to whom we can give the credit of originality; nor

can we name him as a poetic genius capable of giving new ideas. He shows several

weaknesses …( Inscriptions of Early Guptas, C.I.I, Vol III, pp. 169). D.R. Bhandarkar

feels thus: “This common group of ideas indicates that Vatsabhatti is conversant not

only with the Meghaduta but also with his Ritusamharam.” Ibid, pp169. If Vatsabhatti

62

of 473 A.D. Un-ashamedly imitated Kalidasa thus, then it means that the

Kavikulaguru must have flurished at least a hundred years earlier. Thus Kalidasa’s

period precedes that of Guptas.

PATTAN COPPER PLATES INSCRIPTION OF PRAVARASENA II

OF VAKATAKA KINGDOM

It is dated in 27th regal year of Pravarasena II corresponding to 447 A.D. This

is a prose inscription written by one Kalidasa, who was serving under Senapati

Katyayana. This is an important inscription in the sense that “this is the first time that

the name Kalidasa has been discovered in a record of the Gupta period.” ( Inscriptions

of Vakatakas, C.I.I. Vol. V, pp 58). Prof. V.V.Mirasi analyses the inscription thus: “ It

abounds in mistakes of orthography, Sandhi, syntax, declension, conjugation, verbal

and nominal derivatives etc., most of which must be attributed to the ignorance or

carelessness of the writer.” The great orientalist dismisses the identity of this

Kalidasa with the Prince of Indian Poets when he says, “The scribe of the present

plates had a very imperfect knowledge of Sanskrit. As pointed above, there are

numerous orthographical and grammatical mistakes, for most of which the writer, not

the engraver, must have been responsible…….It is incredible that such a great poet

as Kalidasa would commit so many mistakes…….which disfigure the present

record. Disappointing as it is, one has to admit that the scribe was only a

namesake and a contemporary of, but not identical with the prince of Sanskrit

poets.” Ibid. pp. 59

This inscription clearly declares that by the time of its composition, Kalidasa

reached the pinnacle of fame that poets, scholars and people named their children as

Kalidasas—Navakalidasa, Kumarakalidasa, Parimalakalidasa etc., . This practice of

naming after Kalidasa, during the first half of 5th century definitely gives us a date of

Kalidasa that is anterior to the age of Guptas. Hence, Kalidasa could not have been

in the court of any emperor of Gupta dynasty.

Allahabad stone pillar inscription of Samudragupta (assigned to 263 A.D.)

clearly reveals the influence of Kalidasa on its author. Poet Harishena describes the

conquest of Samudragupta by closely following the details given in the Digvijaya of

Raghu depicted by Kalidasa in fourth canto of Raghuvamsa. Many a writer of

Inscriptions fall back on the works of Kalidasa for several descriptions. Thus,

Kalidasa’s name and poetry must have been household talk among the folk of earlier

times.

The only possible date of Kalidasa under these circumstances is that the

Kavikulaguru must have lived in the reign of Agnimitra or one of his successers.

63

APPENDIX II

ANALYSIS OF BALAKANDA OF THE RAMAYANA

“I believe that the original Ramayana consisted of three kandas only viz., the

Ayodhyakanda, Aranyakanda and Yuddhakanda. Later the Ayodhyakanda got split up into

Bala and Ayodhaya and Aranyakanda into Aranya, Kishkindha and Sundarakandas, making a

total of six kandas with a supplement.” Dr. P.L.Vaidya, Introduction to Critical Edition of

Yuddhakanda, XXIX

“ There can be no doubt that the whole book VII i.e., the Uttarakanda was added later

to the work; but it has also long been recognised that the whole of book I (Balakanda) cannot

have belonged to the original work of Valmiki.” Winternitz, A History of Indian Literature, Vol. I,

475

“It has been generally admitted that the original Ramayana consisted of the five

kandas (II-VI) only and that the Balakanda and Uttarakanda were added later on”. Dr.

G.H.Bhatt, Introduction to the Critical Edition of Balakanda, pp. XXXI

“The Balakanda, unlike the other five kandas (II-VI) shows the puranic features which

may suggest its lateness.” Dr.G.H.Bhatt, ibid

“The first and last books, the Bala and the Uttarakandas, dealing as they do

with events before and after the main story have long been recognised to be later

additions to the original Ramayana of the Ayodhya to Yuddhakandas.” J.L.

Brockington, Righteous Rama, pp. 53

ANALYSIS IN DETAIL

CANTOS 1-4: INTRODUCTION:

“The first four sargas of the Balakanda by their very nature could not have formed

part of the original text of Valmiki. They represent an after thought for giving a finishing touch

to the old poem….” G.H.Bhatt, C.E. B.K. pp. XXXI

“It is quite obvious that the four sargas are later added to the Balakanda which itself

happens to be a later interpolation in order to make the Epic complete…. The four sargas

seem to have been added to the Balakanda before Kalidasa”. G.H.Bhatt, C.E.B.K. pp. 435

CANTOS 9-11, RSYASRINGA EPISODE:

“ The episode of Rsyasringa and Sagara do not appear to be the parts of the original

epic from the view-point of content.” ibid, pp. XXXI. Prof. Luders has thoroughly discussed the

episode of Rshysringa and came to the conclusion that Balakanda’s version is later than

those of the Mahabharata (3.110-3) and Padmapurana.

64

Association of Rsyasringa with a vow, which links the twelve names of Vishnu with

the twelve months and fulfils all wishes, especially that for sons, is found in Rigvidhana 3.27-

8. J.L.Brockington, R.R. foot- notes 78 on page 56.

CANTOS 12-14: ASWAMEDHA SACRIFICE:

Lassen has pointed to the awkwardness with which the Putreshti1 (1-14) supervenes

on the Aswamedha (1-11-13) in the account of Dasaratha’s sacrifices. C.E. B.K. pp. 56.

CANTOS 31-64: VISWAMITRA EPISODE:

“ The sargas 31-64 which give an account of Viswamitra have no direct bearing on

the main topic. The present sarga 65 should naturally follow sarga 30…”C.E. B.K. pp.456

“ The whole of the Viswamitra episode (1.31-67) lacks direct relevance to the main

story of Rama and could be omitted.”…J.L.Brickington, Righteous Rama, pp. 57

CANTOS 38-44: THE DESCENT OF GANGES AND THE EPISODE OF KING SAGARA:

“ The Descent of Ganges (1.38-44) should be a special and interpolated part because

it also ends with a sravanaphala.” Jacobi, quoted in C.E.B.K. pp.451.

“ Lassen and Kirfel have discussed these passages in detail and came to the

conclusion that these passages have been worked out under the influlence of Harivamsa,

Brahmanda, Vayu and Vishnupurana and Mahabharata. Sagara episode occurs in sarga 37

of Balakanda as well as sarga 36 of Ayodhyakanda. Their comparison would show that the

form of the story given in Balakanda is later than the story in the Ayodhyakanda. This may

naturally suggest that Balakanda is a later addition.” C.E.B.K. pp. 451

CANTOS 50-64: SATANANDA’S ACCOUNT OF VISWAMITRA:

Jacobi1 opines that the number of puranic accounts --of Vasistha’s cow, of Trisanku,

of Ambarisha’s sacrifice and of Menaka- are suggestive of their relatively late date. Since

there is no mention of the birth of Sakuntala in the accounts of Visvamitra and Menaka, it

implies that the Balakanda’s account is earlier than the Sakuntalopakhyana (1-62-9) of

Mahabharata. Antoine1 considers the account of Visvamitra by Satananda (1.50-64) to be an

independent ‘epic song’.

CANTOS 69-70: GENEAOLOGIES OF DASARATHA AND JANAKA:

Kirfel has compared these genealogies of Dasaratha and Janaka with those of

Brahmanda and Vayupurana. He has shown that the account of Balakanda is later than those

of the puranas.

CANTOS 73-76: EPISODE OF PARASURAMA:

Lassen has pointed to the abrupt insertion of the Parasurama episode. He argues

that the episode along with Putreshti has purpose of asserting Rama’s nature as an avatar of

Vishnu, which is not otherwise explicitly claimed in the Balakanda.1 Kirfel1 feels that

Parasurama Episode along with the episode of Rshyasringa and Sagara were added to the

Balakanda long after the period of its composition. Parasurama episode, late as it is, must be

substantially earlier than the Vishnudharmottara Purana at the start of the seventh century.

65

In a sweeping way, Vekerdi feels that the entire group of sargas (1.14-18) relating to

the legend of Vishnu’s incarnation as Rama, except 15, the original introductory sargas 5-7,

the subsequent introduction 1-4 (except 3) and the last sarga (1.76), all are connected to the

basic story of the Ramayana in a way that most of the Balakanda is not1.

* * * * * *

ANALYSIS OF UTTARAKANDA OF THE RAMAYANA

“There can be no doubt at all that the original poem ended with book VI and that the

following book VII is a later addition. The seventh book contains numerous myths and

legends similar to those which also occur in the Mahabharata and the other puranas, which

have nothing at all to do with the Rama legend.” …Winterniz, A history of Indian Literature,

Vol. I, pp. 475-6

“The Ramayana is said to have 24,000 verses in 500 sargas, while the epic available

to us contains more sargas and a far larger number of verses in its first six kandas. This is an

undeniable proof of the fact that the incidents subsequent to Sita’s exile were added to the

body of the epic. Hence the Uttarakanda can be said as an interpolation.”… Acharya

Kalikumaradatta Shastry, Introduction to Kundamala.

“ The first and the last books, the Bala and the Uttarakandas, dealing as they do with

events before and after the main story, have long been recognised to be later additions to the

original Ramayana of Ayodhya to Yuddhakandas.”.. J.L.Brockington, Righteous Rama, pp. 53

“Certainly, it is possible to discern something of the process whereby both the

Balakanda and the Uttarakanda have been built up out of a number of virtually independent

episodes, many of which have links with other literature and are indeed markedly puranic in

character. Such links have often been used to date the various parts and inferentially the

entire books.” Ibid. 56

“Only one section from each, the genealogies and background of Rama and Ravana

respectively, appear as a prologue to the Ramopakhyana, and the evidence probably indicate

that this passage is the source whence the Balakanda and the Uttarakanda have been

expanded.” Ibid. 228

“The reluctance with which the Uttarakanda was accepted in to the text is well shown

by the internal evidence of the Phalashruti at the end of the Yuddhakanda, which refer to the

epic as complete at that point, and of the Balakanda summaries, which virtually ignore it.”

Ibid. 314.

66

“External references indicate that it was becoming recognised during the Gupta

period.” Ibid. 314

Negative evidence against the Uttarakanda in the early centuries of Christianity,

“should be taken as pointing to lack of acceptance of the Uttarakanda rather than its nonexistence.”

Ibid. 315

“Apart from the accounts of Ravana and Hanuman, the Uttarakanda in general

displays every sign of being later than the Balakanda, for example in regularly viewing Rama

as divine, and in showing markedly less divergence between the recessions.” Ibid. 59

The Uttarakanda reveals the coming together of two obviously independent

units, the Agastya’s account of Ravana (7.1-34) and the story of Sita’s abandonment.

The stylistic patterns of these two accounts make them quite apart.

* * * * * * * *

DETAILED ANALYSIS

OF UTTARAKANDA OF THE RAMAYANA

CANTOS 1-34 GENEALOGIES OF RAVANA:

“At any rate, presumably the Ravana’s genealogy was included in the

Ramopakhyana earlier than in the Ramayana, since otherwise more of the story of the

Uttarakanda would have been included. Moreover, the Ramopakhyana seems to have pieced

together its accounts of Ravana’s activities from stray indications in the earlier parts of

Ramayana, for there is a striking lack of verbal similarities to the equivalent part of the

Uttarakanda.” Righteous Rama, pp. 228-29

“The whole impression is of a much more ornate style, not dissimilar from the

elaborated passages of the second stage, from which it may not differ too greatly in date.”

Ibid. Pp .58

CANTOS 35-36: STORY OF HANUMAN:

“The history of Hanuman, despite its independent origin from the other account of

Ravana, shows the same stylistic elaboration. Thus belong to the second stage (of

composition of the Ramayana). Ibid. Pp. 58

CANTOS 40-110: STORY OF ABANDONMENT OF SITA:

“ All of it is narrated in a bare, unadorned style.. ……….there is no real difference

between the narrations of obvious puranic insertions, such as the stories of Sveta and Danda

(7.68-72) or of Ila (7.78-81) and episodes such as the banishment of Sita (7.42-47) which are

central to its plot”. Ibid, Pp 59

* * * * *

67

APPENDIX III

NOTE ON SOME IMPROVEMENTS MADE BY

KALIDASA IN RAGHUVAMSA REGARDING

THE STORY OF RAMAYANA

Kalidasa had made use of the motif of the curses and boons in the context of the

birth of two great heroes, Raghu and Rama. The curse of Kamadhenu comes in the

context of the birth of Raghu, who lent his name to the dynasty issuing out of the Sun God.

Indeed it is paradox to have a curse, which is meted out as punishment, should usher in

the advent of the great hero. King Dilipa had expiated himself from the curse of

Kamadhenu by serving Nandini with profound devotion and steady mind. He was blessed

with her boon that he would father a son in whose name the great dynasty was going to be

known.

Kalidasa must have believed, as do most of the Indians, that curses, boons and

trials and tribulations bring a great personality on to the earth. He repeated the motif of

curse in the story of Rama by introducing the curse of Dasaratha and gave importance to

the promise and guarantee of Vishnu to the Gods. From a comparative study of the

episode of Dasaratha's curse as given in the Ramayana and Raghuvamsa, it seems that

the Ramayana's version is later and is more improbable, where as the narration given in

the Raghuvamsa comes natural and appears to be original in conception. In the

Ramayana, no one except Dasaratha knew about the curse. According to Raghuvamsa,

every one, all the queens and even the soldiers knew about the curse. It is devoid of all

supernatural elements. The conduct of Dasaratha is more humane in Raghuvamsa than

in the Ramayana. In Raghuvamsa Dasaratha is miserable for killing an innocent boy and

allowing his blind parents to die. He not only accepts the curse as a befitting punishment

for his crime but also considers it as desirable boon that confers on him progeny. In the

setting of the Raghuvamsa, the incident takes place when Dasaratha was in a fairly

advanced stage of life and when he was actually pinning for the birth of a son. That is why

he could take the cruel curse as a blessing in disguise. But in the Ramayana, the incident

occurs when Dasaratha was quite young and not quite responsive to the gravity of the

incident.

The curse logically leads to the birth of Rama. Regarding the expiation for the

curse, Dasaratha is literally burnt within and purified himself. This curse poetically

balances the other curse of Nandini. Both the curses usher in the birth of mighty heroes.

There is an implied suggestion also in this incident. The kings of the dynasty were known

for maintaining 'varnashrama dharmas' scrupulously by following the principle of ' yatha

68

aparadha dandanam' i.e., dispensing punishment befitting the crime. Rama was known to

have killed a sudra-sage, Shambuka for doing penance. Kalidasa suggests through the

curse of Dasaratha that he also maintained the varna order, unknowingly, by killing the

boy and through him, his blind parents, the sudra hermit couple. Thus the narration of

Kalidasa is poetic, reasonable and effective.

Kaliasa's narration was worked out elaborately by one who added it later to the

Ramayana by highlighting the tragic scenes, wailing, repentance and finally ending with

super-natural depiction of the dead young sage rising in to heaven as a divine person.

We find some differences between the two versions such as:

a). In the Ramayana the incident took place when Dasaratha was young and

unmarried while in Raghuvavmsa it happened when he was quite advanced in age and

was pinning for a son.

b). In Ramayana Dasaratha killed the boy on the bank of river Sarayu, but in

Raghuvamsa, the river was Tamasa.

c). In Ramayana, the dying boy asked Dasaratha to remove the arrow and died as

soon as it was extracted by Dasaratha. Leaving the dead boy behind, Dasaratha

approached the blind parents. In Raghuvamsa, Dasaratha carried the wounded boy with

the arrow unextracted to his parents. The boy died in the presence of his parents when

the arrow was removed from the body.

d). In Raghuvamsa, the boy mereIy, told that he was the son of a 'dwijetara'-nontwice-

born, while in Ramayana, he informed that he was the son of a vysya through a

sudra woman.

e). In Ramayana, when the boy died, he attained divine body and went to the heaven

in a plane. This not so in Raghuvamsa.

f). In Raghuvamsa, Dasaratha arranged for the funeral pyre for the blind parents who

committed self - immolation. The Ramayana is silent as to the end of the blind couple.

g). The Ramayana describes the walling of the boy as well as the parents at great

length high lighting the tragedy.

J.L.Brockington feels the two sargas 2.57 and 58 in the Ramayana are to "have

certainly been much expanded, if indeed the whole passage, is not simply an insertion."

Righteous Rama, pp.331.

..................................................................

69

APPENDIX IV

COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF VERSES FROM

RAMAYANA AND RAGHUVAMSA

NAME OF KANDA UDALI ’S COM ANUKRAMANIKA CRITICAL RAGHUVAMSA

Sargas verses Sargas Verses Sargas Verrses Verses

Balakanda 77 2280 64 2850 76 1941 179

Ayodhyakanda 119 4415 80 4170 111 3170 24

Aranyakanda 75 2732 114 4150 71 2066 32

Kishkindhakanda 67 2620 64 2925 66 1984 4

Sundarakanda 68 3006 43 2045 66 2487 7

Yuddhakanda 131 5990 105 4500 116 4435 133

Uttarakanda 110 3234 90 3360 100 2689 173

Total 647 24,277 560 24,000 606 18,772 552

APPENDIX V

KANDA DIVISION OF RAGHUVAMSA

Kanda Cantos Verses

Balakanda X, XI 86+93=179

Ayodhaykanda XII 1-24=24

Aranyakanda XII 25-56=32

Kinshkandhakanda XII 56-60=4

Sundarakanda XII 61-67=7

Yuddhakanda XII,XIII,XIV 68-

104=37+79+17=133

Uttarakanda XIV,XV 70+103=173

Total 6 552

70

APPENDIX VI

PARALEL EXPRESSIONS BETWEEN

RAGHUVAMSA AND UTTARAKANDA OF VALMIKIRAMAYANA

®úPÉÖ´ÉƶɨÉ =kÉ®úEòÉhb÷¨ÉÂ

ºÉ¦ÉÉVÉxÉɪÉÉä{ÉMÉiÉÉxÉ ºÉ Ênù´ªÉ¨ÉÖxÉÒxÉÂ..... +ÉVÉM¨ÉÖ®Âú @ñ¹ÉªÉ& ºÉ´Éæ ®úÉvÉ´ÉÆ |ÉÊiÉxÉÎxnùiÉÖ¨ÉÂ*

XIV.18 VII.1.1

vɨÉÉÇlÉÇEòɨÉä¹ÉÖ ºÉ¨ÉÉÆ |É{Éänäù §ÉÉiÉÞʦÉ& ºÉʽþiÉÉä ®úɨÉ& |ɨÉÖ¨ÉÉänù.....

ªÉlÉÉ iÉlÉè´ÉÉ´É®úVÉä¹ÉÖ ºÉÖJɨÉÂ* XIV.21 VII.40.1

<ªÉä¹É ¦ÉÚªÉ& EÖò¶É´ÉÎxiÉ MÉxiÉÖÆ iÉ{ÉÉä´ÉxÉÉÊxÉ {ÉÖhªÉÉÊxÉ pùŸÖõʨÉSUôÉ欃 ®úÉPÉ´É*

¦ÉÉMÉÒ®úlÉÒiÉÒ®ú iÉ{ÉÉä´ÉxÉÉÊxÉ* XIV.28 MɃóÉiÉÒ®ú ÊxÉÊ´ÉŸõÉÊxÉ...... 41.23,24

®úÉVÉ̹ɴÉƶɺªÉ ®úÊ´É|ɺÉÚiÉä¯û{ÉκlÉiÉÆ ..EÖò™äô VÉÉiÉ <I´ÉÉEÚòhÉÉÆ ¨É½þÉi¨ÉxÉɨÉÂ*

...¨ÉkÉ& ºÉnùÉSÉÉ®ú¶ÉÖSÉä& Eò™ôRóEò& .. XIV.37 ºÉÒiÉÉÆ {ÉÉ{ɺɨÉÉSÉÉ®úÉÆ.... VII. 44.4

+´Éè欃 SÉèxÉɨÉxÉPÉäÊiÉ ËEò iÉÖ +xiÉ®úÉi¨ÉÉ SÉ ¨Éä ´ÉäÊkÉ ºÉÒiÉÉÆ ¶ÉÖrùÉÆ ªÉ¶Éκ´ÉxÉÒ¨ÉÂ*

™ôÉäEòÉ{É´ÉÉnùÉä ¤É™ô´ÉÉx¨ÉiÉÉä ¨Éä* XIV.40 {ÉÉè®úÉ{É´ÉÉnù& ºÉ֨ɽþÉƺiÉlÉÉ VÉxÉ{ÉnùºªÉ SÉ** VII.44.10

iÉnäù¹É ºÉMÉÇ& Eò¯ûhÉÉpÇùÊSÉiÉèxÉÇ xÉ SÉÉκ¨É |ÉÊiÉ´ÉHò´ªÉ& ºÉÒiÉÉÆ |ÉÊiÉ EòlÉÆSÉxÉ*

¨Éä ¦É´ÉÊ‘ù& |ÉÊiɹÉävÉxÉÒªÉ&* +|ÉÒÊiÉ& {É®ú¨ÉÉ ¨ÉÁÆ ¦É´ÉäkÉÖ |ÉÊiÉ´ÉÉÊ®úiÉä**

ªÉtÌlÉiÉÉ ÊxɾÇþiÉ´ÉÉSªÉ¶É±ªÉÉxÉ ¶ÉÉÊ{ÉiÉÉÉ ¨ÉªÉÉ ªÉÚªÉÆ ¦ÉÖVÉɦªÉÉÆ VÉÒÊ´ÉiÉäxÉ SÉ*

|ÉÉhÉÉx¨ÉªÉÉ vÉÉ®úʪÉiÉÖÆ ÊSÉ®Æú ´É&** XIV.42 VII.44.18,19

ºÉÉ訪ÉäÊiÉ SÉɦÉɹªÉ.. ...ºÉÉèʨÉjÉä ºÉÖ¨ÉxjÉÉÊvÉÊŸõiÉÆ ®úlɨÉÂ*

®úlÉÆ ºÉÖ¨ÉxjÉ|ÉÊiÉ{ÉzÉ®úζ¨É¨ÉÉ®úÉä{ªÉ ºÉÉèʨÉÊjɺiÉÖ ®úlɨÉÉ®úÉä{ªÉ ¨ÉèÊlÉ™ôҨɠ|ɪɪÉÉè**

´Éènäù½þºÉÖiÉÉÆ |ÉiɺlÉä** XIV.47 VII.44.15

VÉMÉÚ½þ iɺªÉÉ& {ÉÊlÉ ™ôI¨ÉhÉÉä ªÉiÉ xɪÉxÉÆ ¨Éä º¡Öò®úiªÉt.... VII.45.12

ºÉ´ªÉäiÉ®äúhɺ¡Öò®úiÉÉiÉnùIhÉÉ....... XIV.49

®úÉYÉ& ʶɴÉÆ ºÉÉ´É®úVɺªÉ +Ê{É º´ÉκiÉ ¦É´ÉäkɺªÉ §ÉÉiÉÖºiÉä §ÉÉiÉÞʦÉ& ºÉ½þ*

71

¦ÉÚªÉÉÊnùiªÉɶɶÉƶÉä* XIV.50 VII.45.14

+lÉ ´ªÉ´ÉºlÉÉÊ{ÉiÉ´ÉÉDòlÉÆÊSÉiÉ .....™ôI¨ÉhÉÉä nùÒxÉSÉäiÉxÉ&

ºÉÉèʨÉÊjÉ®úxiÉMÉÇiɤÉɹ{ÉEòh`ö&* XIV.53 +´ÉɃó¨ÉÖJÉÉä ¤Éɹ{ÉMÉ™ôÉä.....* VII.46.10

+É·ÉɺªÉ ®úɨÉÉ´É®úVÉ& ºÉiÉÓ {ÉÉnùSUôɪÉɨÉÖ{ÉÉMɨªÉ......´ÉºÉi´ÉÆ VÉxÉEòÉi¨ÉVÉä*

iÉɨÉÉJªÉÉiÉ´Éɱ¨ÉÒÊEòÊxÉEäòiɨÉÉMÉÇ& XIV.53 VII.46.10

ÊxÉPÉîºªÉ ¨Éä ¦ÉiÉÞÇÊxÉnäù¶É®úÉèIªÉÆ |ɺÉÒnù xÉ SÉ ¨Éä ®úÉä¹ÉÆ EòiÉÖǨɽÇþ漃 ºÉÖμÉiÉä*

näùÊ´É Iɨɺ´ÉäÊiÉ ¤É¦ÉÚ´É xÉ©É&* XIV.58 VII.46.6

VÉÉxÉä ʴɺÉÞŸõÉÆ |ÉÊhÉvÉÉxÉiɺi´ÉɨÉ XIV.72 +ɪÉÉxiªÉä´ÉÉÊºÉ Ê´ÉYÉÉiÉÉ ¨ÉªÉÉ vɨÉǺɨÉÉÊvÉxÉÉ *

VII.48.9

iÉx¨ÉÉ ´ªÉÊlÉŸõÉ Ê´É¹ÉªÉÉxiÉ®úºlÉÆ ªÉlÉÉ º´ÉMÉÞ½þ¨É¦ªÉäiªÉ ʴɹÉÉnÆù SÉè´É ¨ÉÉ EÞòlÉÉ&*

|ÉÉ”ÉÉ漃 ´Éènäùʽþ Ê{ÉiÉÖÌxÉEäòiɨÉÂ* XIV.72 VII.48.12

..·É¶ÉÖ®ú& ºÉJÉÉ ¨Éä, ºÉiÉÉÆ ¦É´ÉSUäônùEò®ú& ×ÉÖ¹ÉÉ nù¶É®úlɺªÉ i´ÉÆ ...

Ê{ÉiÉÉ iÉä* vÉÖÊ®ú κlÉiÉÉ i´ÉÆ {ÉÊiÉnäù´ÉiÉÉxÉÉÆ* VÉxÉEòºªÉ ºÉÖiÉÉ ®úÉYÉ& º´ÉÉMÉiÉÆ iÉä {ÉÊiÉμÉiÉä*

XIV.74 VII.48.8

ºÉJÉÉ nù¶É®úlɺªÉÉÊ{É VÉxÉEòºªÉ SÉ ®úÉYÉÉä nù¶É®úlɺªÉè¹É Ê{ÉiÉÖ¨Éæ ¨ÉÖÊxÉ{ÉÆMÉ´É&....ºÉJÉÉ...

XV.31 VII.46.16

|ÉɉÉÊ™ô¨ÉÖÇÊxɨÉɨÉxjªÉ |ÉÉiɪÉÖÇHò®úlÉÉä ªÉªÉÉè* |ɦÉÉiÉä... ¨ÉÖËxÉ |ÉɉÉÊ™ô®úɨÉxjªÉ |ÉɪÉÉiÉÂ....*

XV.14 VII.58.12

VÉÉxÉ{ÉnùÉä Ê´É|É& ʶɶÉÖ¨É|ÉɔɪÉÉè´ÉxɨÉÂ* ´ÉÞrùÉä VÉÉxÉ{ÉnùÉä ÊuùVÉ&, ¶É´ÉÆ ¤ÉÉ™ô¨ÉÖ{ÉÉnùɪÉ

+´ÉiÉɪÉÉÇRóEò¶ÉªªÉɺlÉÆ uùÉÊ®ú ..¦ÉÚ{ÉiÉä& ®úÉVÉuùÉ®ú¨ÉÖ{ÉÉMɨÉiÉÂ* +|ÉɔɪÉÉè´ÉxɨÉ ¤ÉÉ™Æô .......

XV.42 VII.64.2,5

¶ÉÉäSÉxÉÒªÉ漃 ´ÉºÉÖvÉä ªÉÉ i´ÉÆ nù¶É®úlÉÉcªÉÖiÉÉ* ´ÉºÉÖvÉä ËEò xÉ nùÒhÉÉÇ漃 ®úÉYÉÉä nù¶É®úlÉÉcªÉÖiÉÉ*

®úɨɽþºiɨÉxÉÖ|ÉÉ{ªÉ EòŸõÉiEòŸõiÉ®Æú MÉiÉÉ** ®úɨɽþºiɨÉxÉÖ|ÉÉ”ÉÉ EòŸõÉiEòŸõiÉ®Æú MÉiÉÉ**

XV.43 Alternative verse under VII.64.11

nùnù¶ÉÇ ËEòÊSÉnèùI´ÉÉEòºiÉ{ɺªÉxiɨÉvÉÉä¨ÉÖJɨÉÂ* nùnù¶ÉÇ ®úÉPÉ´É& ™Æô¤É¨ÉÉxɨÉvÉÉä¨ÉÖJÉÆ,iÉ{ªÉxiÉÆ iÉ{É =kɨɨÉÂ

XV.49 VII.66.13,14

+Éi¨ÉÉxÉÆ ¶ÉƤÉÖEÆò xÉÉ¨É ¶ÉÚpÆù ºÉÖ®ú{ÉnùÉÌlÉxɨÉÂ* näù´É™ôÉäEòÊVÉMÉҹɪÉÉ, ¶ÉÚpÆù ¨ÉÉÆ Ê´ÉÊrù EòÉEÖòiºlÉ,

XV.50 ¶ÉƤÉÚEÆò xÉÉ¨É xÉɨÉiÉ&* VII.67.3

72

VÉxÉiÉÉ |ÉäIªÉ ºÉÉoù¶ªÉÆ xÉÉÊIÉEÆò{ÉÆ Ê{ɤÉxiÉ <´É SÉIÉÖ¦ªÉÉÆ ®úÉVÉÉxÉÆ MÉɪÉEòÉè

´ªÉÊiÉ¢öiÉ* XV.67 VII.85.6

MÉäªÉä EäòxÉ Ê´ÉxÉÒiÉÉè ´ÉÉÆ EòºªÉ EòiÉÉÇ EòÉ´ªÉºªÉ ¨É½þiÉ& EòÉä ´ÉɺÉÉè ¨ÉÖÊxÉ{ÉÖÆMÉ´É&*

SÉäªÉÆ EÞòÊiÉ& Eò´Éä&* XV.69 VII.85.18

EòɹÉɪÉ{ÉÊ®ú´ÉÒiÉäxÉ º´É{ÉnùÉÌ{ÉiÉSÉIÉÖ¹ÉÉ ...ºÉÒiÉÉ EòɹÉɪɴÉÉʺÉxÉÒ*

XV.77 +¥É´ÉÒi|ÉÉÆVÉÊ™ô´ÉÉÇCªÉ¨ÉvÉÉäoùÊŸõ®ú´ÉɃÙó¨ÉÖJÉÒ**

VII.88.9

iÉÉ&º´ÉSÉÉÊ®újªÉ¨ÉÖÊqù¶ªÉ |ÉiªÉɪɪÉiÉÖ ¨ÉèÊlÉ™ôÒ |ÉiªÉªÉÆ nùÉiÉÖEòɨÉɪÉɺiÉiÉ& ¶ÉƺÉiÉä ™ôPÉÖ*

XV.73 VII.

´ÉɃó¨ÉxÉ&Eò¨ÉÇʦÉ& {ÉiªÉÉè ´ªÉʦÉSÉÉ®úÉä ªÉlÉÉ.. ªÉlÉɽÆþ ®úÉPÉ´ÉÉnùxªÉÆ ¨ÉxɺÉÉÊ{É xÉ ÊSÉxiɪÉä*

iÉlÉÉ Ê´É·ÉƦɮäú näùÊ´É, ¨ÉɨÉxiÉvÉÉÇiÉ֨ɽÇþʺÉ** iÉlÉÉ ¨Éä ¨ÉÉvÉ´ÉÒ näùÊ´É, Ê´É´É®Æú nùÉiÉ֨ɽÇþʺÉ**

XV.81 ¨ÉxɺÉÉ Eò¨ÉÇhÉÉ ´ÉÉSÉÉ ªÉlÉÉ ®úɨÉÆ ºÉ¨ÉlÉǪÉä*

VII.88.10

B´É¨ÉÖCk´Éä iɪÉÉ ºÉÉv´ªÉÉ ®úxwÉÉ iÉlÉÉ ¶É{ÉxiªÉÉÆ ´ÉènäùÁÉÆ |ÉÉnÖù®úɺÉÒkÉnù‘ùiÉiɨÉÂ*

iºÉtÉä¦É´ÉÉ‘Öù´É&*.. XV.82 ¦ÉÚiÉ™ôÉnÖùÎilÉiÉÆ Ênù´ªÉÆ ËºÉ½þɺÉxɨÉxÉÖkɨɨÉÂ*

VII.88.11

iÉjÉ xÉÉMÉ¡òhÉÉäÎiIÉ”É˺ɽþɺÉxÉ- ÊwɪɨÉÉhÉÉÆ Ê¶É®úÉäʦɺiÉÖ xÉÉMÉè®úʨÉiÉÊ´ÉGò¨Éè&*

ÊxɹÉänÖù¹ÉÒ,..|ÉÉnÖù®úɺÉÒiÉ ´ÉºÉÖÆvÉ®úÉ* XV.83 VII.88.13

¨ÉÉ ¨ÉäÊiÉ ´ªÉɽþ®úiªÉä´É iÉκ¨ÉxÉ ¨ÉÉ ¨ÉäÊiÉ ´ªÉɽþ®úi{ÉÞl´ÉÓ ºÉÉ SÉ

{ÉÉiÉÉ™ô¨É¦ªÉMÉÉiÉÂ* {ÉÉiÉÉ™ô¨É¦ªÉMÉÉiÉÂ*

XV.84 Alternative verse under VII.88.14

ºÉÒiÉÉÆ Ê½þi´ÉÉ nù¶É¨ÉÖJÉÊ®ú{ÉÖxÉÉæ{ɪÉä¨Éä xÉ ºÉÒiÉɪÉÉ& {É®úÉÆ ¦ÉɪÉÉÈ ´ÉμÉä ºÉ ®úPÉÖxÉxnùxÉ&*

ªÉnùxªÉÉÆ, iɺªÉÉ& |ÉÊiÉEÞòÊiɺÉJÉÉä ªÉiGòiÉÚ- ªÉYÉä ªÉYÉä SÉ {É‹ªÉlÉÈ VÉÉxÉEòÒ EòÉÆSÉxÉÒ%¦É´ÉiÉÂ*

xÉÉVɽþÉ®ú* XIV.87 VII.89.4

={ÉäiªÉ ¨ÉÖÊxÉ´Éä¹ÉÉä%lÉ EòÉ™ô&.. EòÉ™ôºiÉÉ{ɺɰü{ÉähÉ ®úÉVÉuùÉ®ú¨ÉÖ{ÉÉMɨÉiÉÂ*

XV.92 VII.93.1

73

ºÉ MÉi´ÉÉ ºÉ®úªÉÚiÉÒ®Æú näù½þiªÉÉMÉäxÉ ªÉÉäMÉÊ´ÉiÉÂ* ºÉ MÉi´ÉÉ ºÉ®úªÉÚiÉÒ®Æú..

XV.95 ÊxÉMÉÞÁ ºÉ´ÉÇ»ÉÉäiÉÉÆ漃 ÊxÉ&·ÉɺÉÆ xÉ ¨ÉÖ¨ÉÉäSÉ ½þ**

VII.96.15

iÉκ¨ÉzÉÉi¨ÉSÉiÉÖ¦ÉÉÇMÉä |ÉÉRÂóxÉÉEò¨ÉÊvÉiɺlÉʹÉ, iÉiÉÉä ʴɹhÉÉäÉiÉÖ¦ÉÉÇMɨÉÉMÉiÉÆ ºÉÖ®úºÉkɨÉÉ&......

XV.96 VII.96.18

Raghuvamsam edited with English Translation by Prof. Nandargikar,

Published by Messrs. Motilal Banarsidas, New Delhi and Crtical Edition of Valmiki

Ramayana, published by the Oriental Institute, Baroda.

***************

APPENDIX VII

PARALEL EXPRESSIONS BETWEEN

RAGHUVAMSA AND BALAKANDA OF VALMIKI RAMAYANA

Raghuvamsa Balakanda-Ramayana

1.+lÉÉOɨÉʽþ¹ÉÒ ®úÉYÉ& |ɺÉÚÊiɺɨɪÉä ºÉiÉÒ* EòÉèºÉ±ªÉÉ ¶ÉÖ¶ÉÖ¦Éä iÉäxÉ {ÉÖjÉähÉÉʨÉiÉiÉäVɺÉÉ*

{ÉÖjÉÆ iɨÉÉä{ɽÆþ ™äô¦Éä xÉHÆò VªÉÉäÊiÉÊ®ú´ÉÉè¹ÉÊvÉ&** Rg.vm X.66 ªÉlÉÉ ´É®äúhÉ näù´ÉÉxÉɨÉÊnùÊiÉ´ÉÇXÉ{ÉÉÊhÉxÉÉ**

Rm I.17.7

¶ÉªªÉÉMÉiÉäxÉ ®úɨÉähÉ ¨ÉÉiÉÉ ¶ÉÉiÉÉänù®úÒ ¤É¦ÉÉè*

ºÉèEòiÉɨɦÉÉäVɤÉÊ™ôxÉÉ VÉÉáþ´ÉÒ´É ¶É®úiEÞò¶ÉÉ** Rg.Vm X.69

2.EèòEäòªªÉɺiÉxɪÉÉä VÉYÉä ¦É®úiÉÉä xÉÉ¨É ¶ÉÒ™ô´ÉÉxÉÂ* Rg.Vm. X.70 ¦É®úiÉÉä xÉÉ¨É EèòEäòªªÉÉÆ VÉYÉä

ºÉiªÉ{É®úÉGò¨É&*Rm.I.17.8

3.ºÉÖiÉÉè ™ôI¨ÉhɶÉjÉÖPÉîÉè ºÉÖʨÉjÉÉ ºÉÖ¹ÉÖ´Éä ªÉ¨ÉÉè* Rg.Vm. X.71 +lÉ ™ôI¨ÉhɶÉjÉÖPÉîÉè ºÉÖʨÉjÉÉ VÉxɪÉiºÉÖiÉÉè*

Rm. I.17.9

4. iÉÉÆ Ê´É™ôÉäCªÉ ´ÉÊxÉiÉÉ´ÉvÉä PÉÞhÉÉ...¨ÉÖ¨ÉÉäSÉ Rg.Vm XI.17. xÉ Ê½þ iÉä ÊÛÉ´ÉvÉEÞòiÉä PÉÞhÉÉ EòɪÉÉÇ..

74

Rm.I.24.15

5........MÉÉÆ MÉiÉÉÊ´É´É...Ênù´É {ÉÖxÉ´ÉǺÉÚ&* Rg.Vm.XI.36 MÉÉÆ |ÉÉ”ÉÉè näù´É™ôÉäEòÉÊnù´ÉɨɮúÉè*

Rm. I.49.19

6...´ÉÒªÉǶÉÖ±Eò¨ÉʦÉxÉxt ¨ÉèÊlÉ™ô&* Rg.Vm.XI.47. ´ÉÒªÉǶÉÖ±EäòÊiÉ ¨Éä EòxªÉÉ ºlÉÉÊ{ÉiÉÉ.

.Rm. I.65.17.

7......iÉk´Éiɺi´ÉÉÆ ´ÉäÊs {ÉÖ¯û¹ÉÆ {ÉÖ®úÉiÉxɨÉÂ* +IɪªÉÆ ¨ÉvÉÖ½þxiÉÉ®Æú VÉÉxÉÉ欃 i´ÉÉÆ

...... ºÉÖ®äú·É®ú¨ÉÂ* Rm.I.75.17

MÉÉÆ MÉiɺªÉ iÉ´É vÉÉ¨É ´Éè¹hÉ´ÉÆ......Rg.Vm.XI.85.

8.ºÉÉvɪÉɨªÉ½þ¨ÉÊ´ÉPÉî¨ÉºiÉÖ iÉä... Rg.Vm.XI.91 ...º´ÉκiÉ iÉä%ºiÉ Ö {É®ÆúiÉ{É*Rm.I.75.17

APPENDIX VIII

ANOTHER LOOK AT THE UTTARAKANDA OF RAMAYANA

AND CANTOS XIV AND XV OF THE RAGHUVAMSAM

The Ramayana of Valmiki is always known to be one of six kandas with a

supplement1. The very name Uttarakanda signifies that it is a 'Iater' book, an

addition to the original. All the Ramayana scholars2, in one voice, agree on this

point. The very fact that the early Indian vernacular translations3 of the Ramayana

did not include the Uttarakanda proves that the ancient Indians also treated the

Uttarakanda as not one of Valmiki. On the other hand vernacular versions had

separate Uttarakandas4. The oldest literary version of Ramayana out side Indian

subcontinent, the Javanese Ramayana Kakavin of Yogisvara of Indonesia, assigned

to the early tenth century, is also silent about the Uttaraknada. Instead, we have a

separate Javanese Uttarakanda in prose5. The bas-reliefs of Loro Jonggrang

75

complex at Prambannan in central Java, Indonesia and sculptures of Ramayana

scenes belonging to the Gupta period at Nacna Kuthara and Deogarh do not

include anything from the Uttarakanda6. The early literary compositions, the plays

of Bhasa, make no reference to any event of the Uttarakanda. Similarly, Bhatti, in

his Ravanavadha, ignored it completely, since he was particularly conservative in

his choice of material.

The earliest reference to the story of the Uttarakanda can be found in

Brihatkatha as retold by Kshemendra and Somadeva in their Brihatkathamanjari

and Kathasaritsagara respectively. Asvaghosha also refers in his Saundaranandam7

to the birth of Kusa and Lava in the hermitage of Valmiki and thus shows his

acquaintance with the story of Uttarakanda. Vimalasuri8 who can be assigned to

the period between first and third centuries A.D. has described in detail the

abandonment of Sita and the birth of the twins and their fight with their father.

Kalidasa summarises the incidents of the Uttarakanda in two cantos XIV and XV

of his Raghuvamsa. Bhavabhuti and Dinnaga had based their Uttararamacarita

and Kundamala on the Uttarakanda of Valmiki. Padmapurana has a detailed

account of the abandonment of Sita in its Patalakanda.

Regarding the period of the composition of the Uttarakanda, it is generally

recognised9 that the Uttarakanda is the latest addition to the Ramayana, later than

the Balakanda. Along with Balakanda, the Uttarakanda is assigned to the third

stage of evolution of the Ramayana. This third stage falls between the first and

third centuries A.D10. Scholars believe that external references indicate that the

Uttarakanda was becoming recognized as a part of the Ramayana during the Gupta

period. They feel that the negative evidence in the form of silence or omission of

incidents from the Uttarakanda in the works and sculptures belonging to Gupta

period would be taken as pointing to the lack of acceptance of the Uttarakanda

rather than its non-existence. But it is with great reluctance alone that the

Uttarakanda was accepted into the fold of the Ramayana. This is inferred by the

presence of the Phalasruti at the end of the Yudhakanda, which refers to the work

as complete at that point.

Ramayana-scholars11 tried to trace the process by which both the Balakanda

and the Uttarakanda have been built out of a number of virtually independent

76

episodes, many of which have links with other puranic literature. The Uttarakanda

reveals that two independent parts, the Agastya's narration of the exploits of

Ravana and the abandonment of Sita, with obvious stylistic differences coming

together to form the core of the text of the Uttarakanda. Agastya's account is of a

much ornate style, not dissimilar from the elaborated passages of the second stage

of the development of the Ramayana. The later part, with its basically non-literary

and puranic character, is narrated in a bare, unadorned style. There is no real

difference between the narration of obvious puranic insertions and the story of

abandonment of Sita. The * passages with good manuscript support and items in

Appendix I12 which have been assigned to the fourth stage, are the last to be added

to the Uttarakanda from 4th century onwards.

Kavikulaguru Kalidasa's Raghuvamsa is the leading work among those that

are based on the Ramayana. It has a unique position in the Sanskrit literature. For

a long time, it is the earliest available Mahakavya13. Even after the discovery of

the Buddhacarita, it is still the earliest work according to the majority of the Indian

scholars14. It is the trend setter for the genre of Mahakavyas15 and also for the

Ramayana-based works. Poets16 dared not to compete with the Raghuvamsa.

In a work of 19 cantos having 1569 verses. Kalidasa has abridged the entire

story of seven kandas of the Ramayana in 550 and odd verses in six cantos from

canto X to XV. Cantos XIV and XV deal with the story of the later life of Rama.

Canto XIV begins with the entry of Rama in to Ayodhya and goes through the

coronation of Rama, rumor about the character of Sita and abandonment of Sita. It

ends with Valmiki offering shelter to Sita. Canto XV starts with the sages'

approaching Rama with a request to kill the demon Lavana. It continues with the

marching of Satrughna to Mathurapura, the birth of the sons of Sita, Satrughna's

fight with Lavana and his destruction, the killing of Sambuka and the horse sacrifice

of Rama. It ends with the disappearance of Sita at the end of her vindication of her

character and the ascent of Rama to the Heave.

Both the cantos XIV and XV are strikingly close and go parallel to the

Uttarakanda. One is struck with the remarkable similarity between them regarding

the course of events, the method of narration and even the ideas, expressions and

phraseology17. Literally these cantos appear to be carbon copy of the Uttarakanda.

77

No new episode taken up by Kalidasa. Not only in major events but also in minor

and insignificant ones Kalidasa, it seems, follows, nay, imitates the Uttarakanda.

Actually there is no need for those two cantos as long as the Uttarakanda continue

to exist. Kalidasa, it appears, has not gained an iota of fame by manufacturing

these cantos. These cantos do not enrich the Sanskrit literature in any manner. On

the other hand, their presence in the Raghuvamsa is considered as a stain on the

poetic career of the Kavikulaguru18.

The analysis of the Ramayana portion of Raghuvamsa, reveals some

interesting facts. It is bewildering to see Kalidasa cruelly, yet skillfully abridging

the ancient, original and authentic Ramayana from the Ayodhyakanda to the

Yuddhakanda into a single canto, canto XII in 104 verses. What made him to

condense the original Ramayana into a single Canto? Why did he linger on and

describe exhaustively only the Balakanda and the Uttarakanda, which are

recognizedly the later addition? Kalidasa has allotted two cantos each for the

Balakanda and the Uttarakanda. From the point of weightage and importance,

Kalidasa has composed for the portions of the Balakanda, the original and

authentic Ramayana and the Uttarakanda portions verses 179,104 and 190

respectively. It is not that both the Bala and the Uttarakanda are rich in incidents

of merit and that the Mularamayana is dry of interesting incidents. On the other

hand, Kalidasa has one complete canto XIII for the mere return journey of Rama

from Lanka. Different scholars19 give different reasons for this kind of weightage

given to the three parts. But it is not so simple to comprehend the scheme of

composition of Kalidasa.

When one reads the portion of abandonment of Sita in Raghuvamsa, a

nagging feeling haunts that he is reading the Uttarakanda a second time. In the

entire history of Sanskrit literature, the Uttarakanda and Raghuvamsa's cantos XIV

and XV present a peculiar situation similar, to that of 'Mriccakatika' and

'Daridracarudatta', but with one difference. Either 'Mriccakatika' is an

amplification of 'Carudatta' or 'Carudatta' 's an abridgment of 'Mriccakatika'. But

Raghuvamsa's cantos XIV and XV are neither abridgment of the Uttarakanda nor

the Uttarakanda is an amplification of Raghuvamsa's portion. Both are almost of

same length, narration and expression. As long as there is the Uttarakanda, no

78

poet, let alone Kalidasa, would compose cantos XIV and XV of the Raghuvamsa.

The scholarly world20 has, without hesitation, pulled Kalidasa for these two cantos.

But one cannot accept that the prince of Indian poets, would meekly, as though

through poverty of ideas, reproduce the Uttarakanda in his magnum opus

Raghuvamsa. Having avoided a direct comparison21 and chance of waging

competition with Valmiki22 in respect to the main story of Rama will Kalidasa

allow himself to be judged and estimated in the later part, which is well recognised

as an appendix? One need not ponder over this point at great length. The answer

is obvious!

It is not Kalidasa who is parading his stolen ware, but the mediocre poet who

wrote the story Uttarakanda, A close comparison of the Uttarakanda with the

cantos XIV and XV of the Raghuvamsa will give more clues than one needs to

substantiate this assertion. The following are some:

1. In the beginning of canto XIV, Kalidasa refers to the honoring and bidding

good-bye to the allies of Rama and to the proverbial Ramarajya23. The

Yuddhakanda of Valmiki Ramayana24 towards its end narrates the same. But

once again the composer of the Uttarakanda takes up the subject as if it is not

described earlier. This is because he overlooked the ending of the Yudhakanda

as he was following Kalidasa closely.

2. Kalidasa refers to Rama's listening to the accounts of Ravana in one

verse25. This led the writer of the Uttarakanda on a never-ending trail of the

accounts of Ravana. These accounts occupy almost half of the Uttarakanda. The

cycle of the adventures of Ravana was already famous by the time of the

Ramopakhyanam of the Mahabharata, which was assigned to the second stage of

evolution of the Ramayana. Various puranas led by the Mahabharata and

Paumacaria of Vimalasuri and other Jain works exhaustively describe the trials

and victories of Ravana. The accounts of Ravana as found in the Uttarakanda,

had come from the pen of a poet whose ornate style is akin to the elaborate

passages of the second stage26, from which it may not differ, too greatly in date.

The rest of the story, the abandonment of Sita is clearly of the third stage of the

Ramayana27. The entire portion is narrated in a matter-of-fact, unadorned and

non-literary style, a style that is generally used for obvious puranic insertions28.

79

It is generally believed that the enlargements are later than the short originals.

The Uttarakanda accounts of Ravana are loose, incoherent and illogical.

Actually, Rama wanted to know about the invincible Meghanada, the Indrajit.

But the sages go on narrating the exploits of Ravana alone. If indeed Kalidasa

were later to the Uttarakanda, he would not have referred at all to listening to the

accounts of Ravana in his eulogy of Raghus. In fact Kalidasa has referred to the

exploits of Ravana in the beginning of canto X. Thus this reference adds nothing

to the context.

3. Kalidasa, as he is writing a Mahakavya, merely says that Valmiki was a

friend and well wisher29 of Dasaratha and Janaka. He need not give full accounts

of how and when that was so. The Uttarakanda30 also mentions about this. But

the Uttarakanda being a Purana, must give details of the relationship that existed

between Valmiki and Dasaratha. It fails in giving the details because the entire

Puranic literature lacks them.

Kalidasa31 mentions the birth of two sons each to Lakshmana, Bharata and

Satrughna along with the birth of Kusa and Lava. The Uttarakanda has totally

forgotten the birth of sons to Lakshmana and others till the very end of the

Uttarakanda.

1.In Raghuvamsa, Sita's message to Rama to protect the varnasramadharmas

has a logical connection with the episode of Sambuka. In the Uttarakanda,

Sita asks Rama to treat and protect the citizens as his own brothers. This

has no sense and connection with the killing of Sambuka.

2.Rama meeting Agastya after killing Sambuka is not so important to be

mentioned in a Mahakavya like the Raghuvamsa. Yet Kalidasa refers to

this incident, as he is original. The Uttarakanda expands this incident into

2 or 3 cantos. If Kalidasa is really later to the Uttarakanda, why should he

refer to this event at all? What does he achieve?

3. Kalidasa mentions that Rama has performed many sacrifices of various

kinds before his meeting with Kusa and Lava. The Yuddhakanda also says

that Rama had performed many sacrifices including Aswamedha in

company of brothers and sons. But the Uttarakanda has a lengthy

80

glorification of the Aswamedha sacrifice as though the performance was

the first of its kind.

8. The Uttarakanda, in ten cantos from 90 to 100, describes the passing away

of the royal mothers Kausalya and others, the settlement of the sons of Dasarathis

and the final ascent of Rama and others into the realm of Heaven in a tasteless

manner. Kalidasa describes the same thing in about 15 verses and gives the

impression that he is original. If indeed he were later he would have dismissed the

entire matter in a phrase or at the most a verse as he did at the end of canto XII. We

cannot expect Kalidasa to drag his feet especially at this juncture, if he is really

following the Uttarakanda.

9. The issue as to the earlier ness of Kalidasa is clinched by the following

verses of Kalidasa from the Raghuvamsa:

1. ¶ÉÉäSÉxÉÒªÉÉ漃 ´ÉºÉÖvÉä ªÉÉ i´ÉÆ nù¶É®úlÉÉSªÉÖiÉÉ *

®úɨɽþºiɨÉxÉÖ|ÉÉ{ªÉ Eò¹ÉÂ]õÉiÉ Eò¹ÉÂ]õiÉ®Æú MÉiÉÉ* XV.43

2. ¨ÉÉ ¨ÉäÊiÉ ´ªÉɽþ®úiªÉä´É iÉκ¨Éx{ÉÉiÉɳý¨É¦ªÉMÉÉiÉÂ* XV.84

3. ´ÉÉRÂó¨ÉxÉ& Eò¨ÉÇʦÉ& {ÉiªÉÉè ´ªÉʦÉSÉ®úÉä ªÉlÉÉ xÉ ¨Éä *

iÉlÉÉ Ê´É¶ÉƦɮúÉ näù´ÉÒ ¨ÉɨÉxiÉvÉÉÇiÉ֨ɽÇþÊiÉ** XV.81

The first two quotes, a full verse and a half verse, occur almost verbatim in *

passages relegated to the foot-notes (of the critical Edition of the Uttarakanda of

Valmiki Ramayana), the passages assigned to fourth stage32 (the period between

the fourth and twelfth centuries A.D. of the Ramayana.

´ÉºÉÖvÉä ËEò xÉ nùÒhÉÉÇ漃 ®úÉYÉÉä nù¶É®úlÉÉSªÉÖiÉÉ*

®úɨɽþºiɨÉxÉÖ|ÉÉ{ÉÂiÉÉ Eò¹ÉÂ]õÉiÉ Eò¹ÉÂ]õiÉ®Æú MÉiÉÉ* (verse No. 1089 in the foot notes to

VII.64.11)

¨ÉÉ ¨ÉäÊiÉ ´ªÉɽþ®úi{ÉÞl´ÉÓ ºÉÉ SÉ {ÉÉiÉɳý¨É¦ªÉMÉÉiÉÂ* ( verse No. 1374 in the foot notes to

VII.88.14)

The third quote, the half verse finds a place in the Uttarakanda at VII.88. 10 in

almost same words: iÉlÉÉ ¨Éä ¨ÉÉvÉ´ÉÒ näù´ÉÒ Ê´É´É®Æú nùÉiÉ֨ɽÇþÊiÉ*

Can we suppose that the Kavikulaguru has "utilised" these half verses and a

full verse from the Uttarakanda to enrich his classic Raghuvamsa, being very much

81

impressed by their strikingness? Can Kalidasa be influenced to such extent by the

third and fourth stage additions (a period between 4th and 12th centuries A.D) to the

Ramayana? If he is later, what made him to opt for these verses to retain them in

his trendsetter Raghuvasmsa?

Thus the originality of Kalidasa and the borrowings by the composer of the

Uttarakanda are proved beyond doubt. The Uttarakanda-writer, just like the author

of Padmapurana, like a disciplined student, walks in the footsteps of Kalidasa

regarding the situations, ideas and expressions. He is not ashamed to lift wholesale

expressions from Kalidasa. On the other hand he seems to be religiously devoted

to Kalidasa not to omit anything from the Raghuvamsa. He follows the master of

poets, verse-by-verse, idea-by-idea, and even phrase-by-phrase. That is the reason

for close parallels between the Uttarakanda and the Raghuvamsa. The Uttarakanda

has continued to be a separate and independent book for many centuries (many

vernacular translations have been composed based upon this Uttarakanda as

independent works), despite the fact that now and then works like Brihatkatha,

Paumacaria etc., amalgamated the later life of Rama into the main story. Only

after many centuries, only in the recent centuries, the Uttarakanda could become

part of the sacred Ramayana.

If Kalidasa is the first to compose the later story of Rama, as available today,

even earlier to the Uttarakanda, who and what, then did provide him the needed

material? It is now generally accepted that even earlier to Valmiki, the history of

Rama was popular among the people and that there must have been other

Ramacaritas. As Valmiki viewed Rama as 'Purushottama', he did not utilize all the

material regarding Rama. As a poet, Valmiki selected some here and some there,

and altogether avoided some other incidents. He also has created some situations

to highlight the pathos, the personality of Rama. The Mahabharata, Harivamsa and

Brihatkatha already knew the later story of Rama. Thus for Kalidasa, it is not

difficult to gather material that was scattered in various sources. He also, as a poet,

selected incidents from diverse sources and added others of his own creation.

Along with the story of abandonment of Sita, he has narrated two incidents from

different sources and added one of his own creations. The first creation is the

introduction of Valmiki as a character in the life of Rama. Kalidasa has envisaged

82

that Valmiki should give shelter to Sita, and educate and look after the sons of Sita.

Thus Kalidasa made the poet Valmiki, the author of the Ramayana to take part in

the life of his own hero. This idea of making the author of the Ramayana a

participant in the life of the hero of the work must have been influenced by the

Mahabharata. Vyasa, the original author of Bharata, has already become the

progenitor of Kauravas and Pandavas and thus a character in his own composition.

The entire story of Bharata revolves round Vyasa from the beginning to the end.

On similar lines, Kalidasa has made Valmiki take part in the story of Rama. By

the time of Kalidasa there was no Uttarakanda. There was only the Purvaramayana

consisting five kandas. Now it is the Uttarakanda alone that revolves round

Valmiki. Not the Purvaramayna. The first incindent he culled from other sources is

regarding the killing of demon Lavana. Kalidasa might have depended upon the

Harivamsa33 for this incident. In describing the foundation of Mathurapura,

Harivamsa describes the confrontation between Lavana and Satrughna. The

second incident Kalidasa introduced is the killing of Sambuka. This incident is

referred to as one of the old times, in the Mahabharata34 during the course of the

story of Jackal and vulture.

During the times of Kalidasa, the abandonment of Sita for an unknown

reason and the confrontation between Rama and his sons might have been the

common knowledge of everyone. This confrontation might have led to the defeat

of Rama at the hands of his sons and ultimately to their coronation. At the end,

Rama might have retired to the forest. This confrontation might have been

changed by Kalidasa who believed in the tradition of the older generation should

hand-over the reins of the kingdom on their own to the younger generation and

should retire to the forest. He scrupulously avoided the confrontation and tamely

and pathetically ended the story. This surmise is possible because even in the early

stages of the development of the Ramayana, even before the acceptance of the

Uttarakanda in to the fold of the Ramayana, this confrontation between Rama and

his sons was well known to Brihatkatha, Paumacaria and other Jaina works. On

the other hand, the Hindu works intentionally avoided this confrontation. It is only

in 9th century that Bhavabhuti, for the first time, hinted at the confrontation, but

the confrontation is shifted to the younger generation i.e., between Candraketu, the

83

son of Lakshmana and Lava, and the son of Rama. Finally it was Jaiminibharata

that gave importance to the confrontation between Rama and his sons on the lines

of the one between Arjuna and his son Babruvahana. The Padmapurana has

enriched this confrontation further with many details. Even then, the orthodox

Hindus have always maintained silence regarding this confrontation. The fact that

the folk literature has made capital use of this confrontation is a different point

altogether.

Foot-notes:

1. Valmiki Ramayana, VII. 100.26

2. Winternitz, A.B. Keith, Jacobi, A.K.Warder, J.L.Brockington, Krishnamacariar,

S.K. Dey

3. Kamba Ramayana in Tamil, Bhaskara Ramayana and Molla Ramayana in Telugu,

Toruve Ramayana in Kannada, Madhavakandali Ramayana in Assamese, Krittivasa

Ramayana in Bengali and Tulalidasa Ramacaritamanasa in Hindi.

4. Ottakutan’s Uttarakanda in Tamil, Ranganathottararamayana, Tikkana's

Nirvacanottararamayana and Kankanti Paparaju's Uttararamayana in Telugu,

Yogindra and Tirumale Vaidya's Uttarakandas in Kannada. Anantha Kandali and

Sankaradeva Uttarakandas in Assamese.

5. J. L. Brockington, Righteous Rama, pp 288, H. B. Sarkar, “The migration of the

Ramayana to Indonesia”, Ramayana Traditions in Asia, pp. 120.

6. Righteous Rama, 314, Ramayana Traditions in Asia, 120

7. Asvaghosha, Saundarananda,

8. Righteous Rama, 266,

9. ibid. 58,

10. Ibid. 314, 315, 329.

11. ibid., 56

12. ibid. 329.

13. The Buddhacarita is discovered only towards the end of 19th century. Indian

rhetoricians knew nothing about it.

84

14. Prof. K.M. Shembavnekar, Nandargikar, R.D. Karmarkar, M.R.Kale, K.Krishna

Murthy believe that Kalidasa belonged to a period earlier to the Ist century B.C.

15. “….The Raghuvamsa may rightly be ranked as the finest Indian specimen of the

Mahakavyas as defined by writers on poetics.” A.B.Keith, A History of Sanskrit

Literature, 92, “The Dynasty of Raghus, is larger in canvas, more comsumate

in thought and style , and many sided in its treatment of the heroes, indicating a

more mature mind. “ K.Krishnamurthy , Kalidasa, 63.

16. Kumaradasa says that he alone dares to compose a work on Rama theme even in

the presence of Raghuvamsa. Janakiharana, I.

17. Appendix I

18. “The real explanation of the weakness of the twelfth and the fifteenth cantos is,

in our opinion, to be sought elsewhere….. the fourteenth canto is rather

colourless.” M.R. Kale, Raghuvamsam, pp. XXXIV.

19. Kale feels that Kalidasa abridged the Ramayana in this way because “ he is

anxious not to narrate at length what had been so well narrated by Valmiki.”

Winternitz also feels so. History of Indian literature, Vol III, part I, pp 72

20. According to Dr. Ryder “….There is, therefore, real matter of regret in the fact

that so great a poet as Kalidasa should have treated it in a way not quite worthy

of it and of himself.” M.R..Kale, Raghuvamsa, pp. XXXIII

21. Dr. Ryder says that Kalidasa did not dare to put himself “into direct competition

with Valmiki” and thus to challenge competition with him. Ibid. pp. XXXIII

22. Kalidasa feels diffident before Valmiki, Raghuvamsa I-2, 3

23. Raghuvamsa, XIV, 19

24. Ramayana, VI, 116.75,84-90

25. Raghuvamsa XIV, 18

26. Righteous Rama, 58.

27. ibid 314,

28. ibid, 58.

29. Raghuvamsa XIV, 74, XV, 31

30. Ramayana VII,

31. Raghuvamsa XV, 13, 35

32. Righetous Rama, 319

85

33. Harivamsam

34. Mahabharata, Santhiparvan

** ** ** ** **

APPENDIX IX

ENCOUNTER OF RAMA WITH PARASHURAMA

The encounter of Bhargavarama with Dasaratharama, the encounter of two

consecutive incarnations of Vishnu with each other is an epoch-making one in the

Ramayana. It takes place on the way, when Dasaratha was returning from the city

of Mithila to Ayodhya with the newly married sons and their brides. At the end of

Swayamvara celebrations of the heroine, it is customary for the poets to describe

the rejected and dejected suitors together attack the chosen bride-groom, and the

hero to defeat them black and blue. In this way the hero is strengthened. It

happened at the marriage of Draupadi when Kauravas assisted by Jarasandha

attacked Pandavas. It also occurred during the marriage of Rukmni. Instead of the

rival kings, in the Ramayana, it is the destroyer of the royal races, Parasurama that

opposes Rama. It is Kshatriya-virya in the garb of Brahmana body that opposes

the Brahma virya in the royal form. The Ramayana describes the encounter at

great length in Balakanda in three cantos from 73 to 75, in about 60 odd verses. It

is interesting to note that Kavikulaguru Kalidasa also has given a special treatment

to this encounter in his Magnum Opus, The Raghuvamsa. Kalidasa narrates this

incident in detail in 35 verses in canto XI. It is curious to find Kalidasa, as though

towing the line of the Ramayana to such an extent that one suspects the very

authenticity of this passage in the context of the Ramayana. Kalidasa's narration of

the episode appears like a carbon copy of the Ramayana, in thought, word, and

phrase. What made Kalidasa to compose this episode in this special manner?

The Mahabharata narrates this event of the encounter between the two Ramas.

in Vanaparva, in the context of various holy places visited by the Pandavas during

86

their sojourn in the forest. According to it, long after Rama's marriage and when

Rama was leading a happy married life, Parasurama arrives at Ayodhya. Even at

the news of his arrival, Dasaratha is terrified. Rama volunteers to go out and meet

the sage outside the citv limits. The meeting proceeds in the manner as mentioned

There is quite some discussion regarding the authority of this encounter in the

text of Balakanda of the Ramavana. Prof. Lassen has pointed to the abrupt

insertion of the episode. He argues that the episode along with Putreshti has the

purpose of asserting Rama's nature as an incarnation of Vishnu, which is not

otherwise explicitly claimed in the Balakaiada. Kirfel feels that Parasuramepisode

along with the episode of Risyashringa and Sagara ere added to the

Balakanda long after the main period of composition. Parasurama episode late as

it is, must be substantially earlier than the Vishnudharmottara Purana at the start of

the seventh century.

The narratives of both the versions of Valmiki and Kalidasa proceed similarly.

1. Bad omens appear before the arrival of Bhargavarama.

2. Dasaratha gets disturbed and asks sage Vasishta about the effects of the omens.

3. Vasishta comforts Dasaratha that all will end well.

4. Parasurama appear before the army dazzling the soldiers and making them

unconscious. Arghya is offered when Bhargava appears. In the Ramayana he

accepts while in Raghuvamsa, he turns it down.

5. Bhargava challenges Rama to wield the mighty Vishnu's bow and aim an arrow

or accept defeat and surrender.

6. Dasaratha who intervenes is turned down.

7. Rama easily and playfully strings the bow and fixes an arrow.

8. Rama corners Bhargava with the same alternatives.

9. As Rama wields the bow of Bhargava Parasurama loses his lustre and becomes

powerless.

10. Parasurama opts for free movement and gives up higher worlds.

11. Bhargava declares that he already knew Rama to be the ultimate God come

down.

12. Bhargava is not upset with his defeat. On the other hand he feels that his defeat

is a blessing in disguise.

87

13. Bhargava wishes Rama good luck in his mission and leaves.

While the narration is similar in both the works, Kalidasa individualizes the

personalities of Rama and Parasurama. In their confrontation, one maintains

coolness while the other is carried by anger. In the Ramayana, Rama is full of

anger, curt and assertive, while Bhargava is serene, dignified and matter of fact. In

Raghuvamsa, Bhargava is the aggressor with terrific anger and is full of boast of

adventures. Rama is cool, balanced, compassionate and silent until the last. In the

Ramayana, Bhargava, at the end of the encounter, retires after circumbulating

Rama, who is realized as Supreme Lord. In Raghuvamsas, Rama, the winner, falls

at the feet of the aggressor, Parashurama and prays for forgiveness. Thus Kalidasa

makes Rama more humane and magnanimous.

The similarities between Valmiki and Kalidasa over-flow the events and

thoughts and extend to the phrases and words also. Such an abundance of

similarities and parallel in ideas, expressions and phrases between Valmiki and

Kalidasa compel us to ponder over the question, " Why did Kalidasa imitate

Valmiki to such an extent in this episode of Parasurama?" Is there any special

reason for this glaring walking in the foot-steps of Valmiki?

In all probability, it must be Kalidasa who introduced the episode of

Parasurama into the Raghuvamsa for the first time as he was fascinated by the

coming together of two epoch-making personalities. He could not miss the striking

and dramatic element present in the episode mentioned in the Mahabharata. He

has given such importance to the Incident that it almost extends to half the canto of

normal size. In a space of 30 verses, Kalidasa has used more than a dozen similes

and three Arthantaranyasas. Similarly there are innumerable Sabdalamkaras. Thus

Kalildasa does not seem to be plagiarist.

It is the interpolator of Balakanda, as thought by Prof. Lassen and Kirfel,

who imitated, copied and plagiarized Kalidasa's account without any shame

because he thought he was making the divine story complete. The devotee

interpolator of the Balakanda has no qualms of plagiarism as he was composing

sacred and religious work.

Thus Kalidasa has made the episode of the encounter of Rama and

Parasurama memorable one in the story of Rama.

88

APPENDIX X

RAMAYANAS IN INDIAN LITERATURE

SANSKRIT:

1. Adhyatma Ramayana

2. Ananda Ramayana

3. Adbhuta Ramayana

4. Jaimini Bharata (Ramayana)

SOUTHERN LITERATURE:

TAMIL:

5. Ramavatar of Kamban ( 9-12th century A.D.)-No Uttarakanda

6. Uttarakanda of Ottakkutan

TELUGU:

7. Ranganatha Ramayana of Gona Buddhareddy ( 1240 A.D.)----No Uttarakanda

8. Bhaskara Ramayana ( 13th century A.D.)—No Uttarakanda

9. Molla Ramayana (14-15th century A.D)—No Uttarakanda.

10. Gopinatha Ramayana (18th century A.D.)

11. Kottavaradaraja Ramayana (18th century)

1. Srikrishna Ramayana (20th century)

2. Nirvacanottara Ramayana of Tikkana (1260 A.D.)- _Only Uttara Kanda.

3. Jaimini Aswamedha of Pillalamarri Pinavemana (15th century)-Only Uttarakanda

4. Ranganathottara Ramayana of Kaca vibhudu and Vitthala (17th century)-Only

Uttarakanda

5. Uttararamayana of Kamkanti Paparaju (17th century)- Only Uttarakanda.

6. Ramayana Kalpavrikshamu of Vishvanatha Satyanarayana ( 20th century)-No

Uttarakanda

KANNADA:

18. Pampa Ramayana of Nagacandra (12th century)- Jaina version of Ramayana

19. Toruve Ramayana of Narahari (Kumara Valmiki) (16-17th century)—No

Uttarakanda

20. Venkata Ramayana of Venkatamatya (16-17th century)

21. Kausika Ramayana of Bhattaleswara (16-17th century)

22. Jaimini Ashwamedha of Lakshmisa (16th century)—Only Uttarakanda

23. Ramashwamedha of Muddanna (19th century)—Only Uttarakanda

89

24. Srimad Ramayanadarshanamu of Kuvempu (20th century)—No Uttarakanda

25. Sriramapattabhisheka of Masati Venkatesha Iyengar (20th century)—No

Uttarakanda

MALAYALAM:

26. Ramacaritam of Ceraman (12th century)—Only Yuddhakanda

27. Kannassan Ramayana of Rama Panikkar (15th century)

28. Ramakatha Pattu of Ayyaipilla Asan (15th century)

29. Ramayana Campu of Puran Nambutri (15th century)

NORTHERN LITERATURES:

HINDI:

30. Ramacaritamanasa of Tulasidas (1574 A.D.)—No Uttarakanda

31. Surdas Ramayana

ASSAMESE:

32. Ramayana of Madhavakandali ( 14th century)—No Bala and Uttarakandas

33. Ramayana of Anantha Kandali (15th century)—No Uttarakanda

34. Lava-Kusar Yuddha of Harivara Vipra (14th century)—Only Uttarakanda

35. Uttarakanda of Sankaradeva (15h century)—Only Uttarakanda

BENGALI:

36. Krittivasa Ramayana (15th century)

37. Candravai Ramayana (16th century)

ODIYA:

38. Jagnmohana Ramayana of Balaramadas (16th century)

39. Vilinka Ramayana of Saraladas (16th century)

40. Vicitra Ramayana of Vishwanatha Khuntia

MARATHI:

41. Bhavartha Ramayana of Ekanath (1533-1599 A.D.)—No Yuddhakanda and

Uttarakandas

42. Uttarakanda of Govaba

43. Uttarakanda of Mukteshwar

GUJARATI:

44. Ramayana of Nakar (1568 A.D.)

45. Ramayana of Kahan (1571 A.D)

46. Ramayana of Vishnudas (1589A.D.)

47. Ramacarita of Giridhar (1837 A.D.)

PANJABI:

90

48. Raamavathar of Guru Gobinda Singh (18th century)

MANIPURI:

49. Ramayana of Angom Gopi ( 1709-1748 A.D.)

KASHMIRI:

50. Prakasha Ramayana of Prakash Ram Kurygam (1846 A.D.)

51. Sankar Ramayana of Sankara Kanth

PERSIAN:

52. Ramayana of Abdul Quadir Bada’ouni (1588 A.D.)

53. Mashih Ramayana

JAINA RAMAYANAS:

SANSKRIT:

54. Padmacaritam of Ravisena (677 A.D)

55. Mahapurana of Jinasena and Gunabhadra ( 9th century)

56. Trisashtisalakapurushacarita of Hemacandra (12th century)

PRAKRIT:

57. Paumacariya of Vimala Surin (4th century A.D.)

58. Vasudevahindi of Sanghadas Gani (5th century)

PALI:

59. Jatakas

91

FOOT NOTES

1 Prof. K.M. Shembavnekar, Prof. Nandargikar, Dr. R.D. Karmarkar, M.R.Kale.

2 “……the Raghuvamsa may rightly be ranked as the finest Indian specimen of the Mahakavyas as

defined by writers on poetics.” A.B.Keith, A History of Sanskrit Literature, pp. 92

3 V.V.Mirasi, S.K. De, Krishnamachariar, R. D. Karmarkar, K.Krishnamurthy, Siegfried Lienhard,

Winternitz.

“ The dynasty of Raghus, is larger in canvas, more consummate in thought and style, and many sided in

its treatment of the heroes, indicating a more mature mind. “ K.Krishnamurthy, Kalidasa, pp .63

“It reveals his genius at its best, his intellect at its ripest, his imagination at its highest, and his learning

at its richest.” V.V. Mirasi, Kalidasa, pp. 158

“That the Kumara, is an earlier work of the poet cannot be doubted.” R.D.Karmarkar, Kalidasa, pp.24

“Raghuvamsa is by far the best of Kalidasa’s poetical works…….The existence of 33 commentaries on

this mahakavya is a proof of its great popularity.” V.V.Mirasi, Kalidasa, pp.185

4 Hilbrandt, Aurobindo, A.B.Kieth, A.K.Warder

“From the common poetical standpoint, the Kumarasambhava stands higher, which gives expression to

the richness of his knowledge, his phantacy and the freshness of his feelings in very lively images…

the Kumarasambhava surpasses it (Raghuvamsa) in poetic matters, in the commonly human interest

and charming effect.” Hillbrandt, Kalidasa, pp.30

“..……to modern taste the Kumarasambhava appeals more deeply by reason of its richer variety, the

brilliance of its fancy and the greater warmth of its feelings.” A.B.Keith, A history of Sanskrit

literature, pp.87

“Kalidasa’s art is at its happiest in the Origin of Kumara, in which he has found full scope for his

special abilities. It seems natural to regard it as his last.” A.K.Warder, Indian Kavya Literature, Vol.III.

pp.154

5 “Although our poet has written charming lyrics and plays also, yet later writers and compilers of

apophthegms from Sanskrit literature endearingly designate him as Raghukara, the author of the

Raghuvamsa.” V.V.Mirasi, Kalidasa, pp. 185

“ There is no wonder, therefore, if the whole poem has found admirers by the millions, and has

become, in words of Sanskrit rhetoricians, murdhabhishikta of all the kavyas in popularity.” M.R.

Kale, Raghuvamsa, pp.XXXIV, “ That this kavya of Kalidasa’s about A.D. 600 was well known in

widely distant parts of India and even beyond the confines of India proper, there can be no doubt now.”

F. Kielhorn, Epigraphi Indica Vol VI, pp.3. Raghuvamsa’s many descriptions engulfed the minds of

many a writer of inscriptions. Verse XII.1 was in the mind of the author of the Bodh-Gaya inscription

of Mahanama dated in A.D. 588. Verse VI.23 has been imitated in one of the Nagarjuna Hill cave

inscriptions of the Maukhari Ananthavarman of sixth century. “ Besides, so far aas I can judge,, part at

least of the text of the Raghuvamsa was familiar to the composer of the first Cambodian inscriptions

belonging to the commencement of the seventh century.” F. Kielhorn, Inscr. Sansckrites du

Camboddge, pp.13. The author of Mahakuta pillar inscription of Mangalesha, which may be

92

specifically dated in A.D. 602, and was certainly composed before A.D. 610, actually copied the half

verse of Raghuvamsa. I.6

6 Hillebrandt, S.K.De, V.V. Mirasi, M.R. Kale, R.D.Karmarkar, K. Krishnamacariar and

K.Krishnamurty hold the work to be incomplete while Indian poet Soddhala, Ruben, A.B. Keith and

A.K.Warder consider the work to be complete. Sodhala says, “ A man of creative genius and of

worldwide celebrity is Kalidasa alone. His expression is so chaste and delicious as to be a substitute

for nectar itself. His fame in the guise of poetry has reached the other shore of the ocean in the form of

solar race.”

Khyatah kriti sopi ca kalidasah suddha sudha svadumati ca yasya,

Vani mishaccandamaricigotrasindhoh param paramavapa kirtih.- Sodhala.

7 Janakiharanam kartum raghuvamse sthite sati,

kavih kumaradasasca ravanasca yati kshamah.- Rajasekhara.

Ka iha raghukare na ramate?

Sancarini dipasikhakalidasa is the title he got after the composition of Raghuvamsa.

Vrittanta viprakirna syuh samhita yatra kovidaih,

Sa samhitetyabhihita raghuvanse yatha kritah.—Saradatanaya in Bhavaprakasha.

8 Athava kritavagdvare vamsesmin purvasuribhih… Raghu. I. 4

9. J.L. Brokington, Righteous Rama, pp. 59

10 . The stories of first seven and the last, viz., Dilipa, Raghu, Aja, Dasaratha, Rama, Kusa, Athithi and

Agnivarana are described in detail and the remaining kings are just mentioned in passing.

11. Vishnupurana, Vayu, Bhagavata, Agni and Matsyapurana.

12 Vishnupurana mentions no less than 37 kings after Agnivarna.

13 A.D. Singh feels that kings Sila, Unnabha, Kausalya, Brahmishta and Putra are “ the original

creations of Kalidasa”, as they are neither found in the Ramayana nor in the puranas. A.D. Singh,

Kalidasa- A critical study, pp. 59

14.It is generally accepted that Padmapurana copies the episode from Kalidasa. Wilson concludes that

Kalidasa’s many works form the basis for many an incident in Padmapurana.

15 Ramayana, I, 38,39 and 40

16 M.R.Kale, Raghuvamsa, pp. XXVI

17 Ramayana, II, 63 and 64

18 Brockington, Righteous Rama, pp 49.

19 . “ Kalidasa does not conceal the fact that he found his model in the great epic of Valmiki.”

Winternitz, A History of Indian literature, Vol. III, Part I, pp. 72 . “ It is no wonder, therefore, that

Valmiki should have been the model of Kalidasa.” M.R.Kale, Raghuvamsa, XXVI. Also A.B.Keith,

A.K.Warder, Ruben, Hillebrandt, and V.V.Mirasi.

20 Cyavana’s version is considered to be one of them. Valmikinadasca sasarja padyam, jagrantha

yanna cyavano maharshih. Buddhacarita, I. 34

21 Raghuvamsa, I, 4

22 Winternitz, Brockington, A.K.Warder etc.,

23 H.H.Wilson, Vishnupurana and analysis of puranas, and R.D. Karmarkar, V.V. Mirasi, M.R. Kale

24 Paumacariya, C XVIII, 103

25 Jacobi assigns the work to 3rd century while A.K.Warder provisionally puts the work as late as in 2nd

century A.D. Indian Kavya Literature, Vol II, pp. 220

26 M.R. Kale, Raghuvamsa, pp XXVI

27.Dr. Ryder feels that Kalidasa did not dare to put himself “ in to direct competition with Valmiki”

and thus to challenge competition with him. Regarding the abridgment Ryder says,” The result is much

loss by omission and much loss by compression… There is, therefore, real matter for regret in the fact

that so great a poet as Kalidasa should have treated it in a way not quite worthy of it and of himself.”

93

M.R. Kale, Raghuvamsa, pp. XXXIII Winternitz also echoes the same sentiment. Winternitz, A History

of Indian Literature, Vol. III part I, pp 72. M.R. Kale opines that Kalidasa abridged the Ramayana in

this way because, “ he is anxious not to narrate at length what had been so well narrated by Valmiki.”.

But the same scholar regrets that “ the twelfth canto has been one of the weakest in the whole poem.”

Raghuvamsa, pp. XXXIII

28 “But his merit shines in such cases as his description of the return journey to Ayodhya. Future poets

were to imitate it, but not one to equal it.” A.B.Keith, A short history of Sanskrit literature, pp. 97.

“asminnati vicitra kaviparamparavahini samsare kalidasaprabhritayo dwitra pancasha va

mahakavayah iti ganyante.” Anandavardhana, Dhwanyaloka II. “In Kalidasa, we have unquestionably

the finest master of Indian poetic style, superior to Aswaghosha by the perfection and polish of his

works, and all but completely free from the extravagance which disfigure the later greater writers of

kavyas.” A. B.Keith, A.H.S.L., pp, 101

29 .J.Brokington, Righteous Rama, pp. 345

30 Even the Ramayanaanjari of Kshemendra, which is nothing but an abridged version, has differed

from its original here and there.

31 “….the real explanation of the weakness of the twelfth and fifteenth cantos is, in our opinion, to be

sought elsewhere…… The fourteenth canto is rather colourless.” M.R. Kale, Raghuvamsa, pp XXXIII

32 Ibid, Rhyder, M.R. Kale, Winternitz.

33 Hemadri, Raghuvamsa Darpana, pp. 444

34 Kathasaritsagara, Abhijnanasakuntala and Mahabharata.

35 It ends with the description of ideal government, the so-called Ramarajya- the cherished hope of

every Indian down the ages. The canto ends with the benedictory verse in which the cooperation

extended by the gods to the noble rulers is praised. Raghuvamsa, XVII.81

36 “ More than this externality the contents hold brief for the working of a later hand. In the place of

the really poetical descriptions of the princes, which we find in the preceding cantos, there appear here

chiefly only the poor tricks on words with the names of the princes, employed rarely by Kalidasa.”

Hillebrandt, Kalidasa, pp. 39

37 “For the rest of the poem sinks in interest, as Kalidasa has nothing to tell us but names of worthless

kings whose harems supplied their sole interest in life.” A.B.Keith, A history of Sanskrit literature, pp.

97

38 . “Whenever our poet had relate incidents in a catalogue fashion, as for instances in Cantos XII, XV

and XVIII, he is never at his best.” M.R. Kale, Raghuvmsa, XXXIII

39 There is a persistent tradition that Raghuvamsa actually contained 25 cantos. “….but it is most

improbable that the poem too ended with it. ….Whether more cantos or only pairs of verses are lost to

us-both being possible- we are not able to take a decision.” Winternitz. Pp. 77. V.V.Mirasi,

R.D.Karmarkar negate the tradition.

40 Keith, though ‘ cannot deny’ the authorship of cantos XVIII and XIX “ gladly assign to a poetaster

meaningless puns on names of kings…or the incredible tastelessness of the action of a king who hangs

his foot out of a window for the people to kiss.” A History of Sanskrit Literature, 97

41 Ragahuvamsa, I, 5-8.

42 Regarding verse XIX.7 of Raghuvamsa, where Agnivarana shows his feet out of window,

Hillebrandt says, “ It is a feature of tastelessness, which the Indian theory of poetry call aslila. It cannot

be from Kalidasa-perhaps it might be the work of a successor who could not rise up to the great task of

the poem…..Certainly the other passages too of the poem do not lack faults of beauty, which are

repugnant to our feeling, but so far as the art of beauty is concerned they are not found to introduce

always new thoughts, images and turns of overwhelming attractions; in fact the text here degenerates to

poverty. Kalidasa’s hand lost the pen before his work was completed and a weaker poet continued the

work.” Hillebrndt, Kalidasa, pp.40

43 It is out of taste to state always, whenever one is unable to trace a source for an event, that the poet

has invented the thing. The maximum one is allowed to state is that the source is beyond ones

knowledge.

44 J.L.Brockington, Righteous Rama, pp.218

45 Note on 6.111-16 Righteous Rama, J.L.Brockington, pp. 345

46 …..vyutkramya lakshmanamubhau bharato vavande. Raghuvamsa, XIII.73

47 Note on XIII.73, Nandargikar, Raghuvamsa, pp. 887.. “ It would not be proper to interpret this

stanza according to the story given in the Ramayana of Valmiki. Kalidasa might have based this

account of his poem according to a different version of the national epic.”

94

48 Tato lakshmanamasadya vaidehim ca parantapah,

Abhyavadayata prito bharato nama cabravith. VI.115.33

49 Critical edition of the Ramayana has completely omitted it. Righteous Rama, pp. 218

50 “There can be no doubt at all that the original poem ended with book VI and that the following book

VII is a later addition…….which has nothing at all to do with the Rama leged.” Winternitz, A history

of Indian Literature, Vol, II. Pp.

51 VII. Cantos 38,39,40

52 XIV.23

53 XIV.67

54 VII.48.14 Yatha bhratrishu vartethah tatha paureshu nityada.

55 XIV. 73

56 VII. 58.10

57 XV. 35 ,36

58 Appendix I. 13

59 sa prishtah sarvato vartamakhyadrajne na santatim,

pratyarpayishyatah kale kave radyasya sasanath. XV.41

60 According to the Uttarakanda, Valmiki himself testifies on the power of his penance to the purity of

Sita.

61 All the authorities, in one voice, assert that it is Kalidasa who is following the foot-steps of Valmiki.

62 “ It might be also a fact that originally Ramayana consisted of three kandas only-the Ayodhya, the

Aranya and Lanka kandas.” Dr. P.L.Vaidya, Introduction to critical edition of Yuddhakanda, pp.29

63 Ramopakhyana of Mahabharata, Dasaratha Jataka, Pratimanataka and Abhisekanataka of Bhasa do

not mention any incident from either Bala or Uttarakandas. Genealogy of Ravana cannot become

integral part of the Uttarakanda.

64 Scholars assign the composition of the two kandas to a period from 1st to 4th centuries A.D. “ Like

the Great Epic, the Ramayana has been much revised, being treated rather as a work of tradition than as

a kavya. In other words, instead of being accepted as a fixed text by a given poet, it became the

property of the popular reciters of Tradition, who were concerned not with meticulous accuracy and

faithful interpretation but with inspiring their mass audiences.” A.K. Warder. Indian Kavya Literature,

Vol, II, pp.77

65 Winternitz, A history of Indian Literature, Vol, III, part I, pp 72. Ryder, as quoted by M.R. Kale,

says that Kalidasa did not care put himself “ into direct competition with Valmiki” and thus to

challenge competition with him. Raghuvamsa, pp.XXXIII

66 A.B.Keith, A.K. Warder, Rhyder etc., “ The twelfth canto has become one of the weakest in the

whole poem.” M.R.Kale, Raghuvamsa, pp XXXIII. “ It may well be doubted whether the cantos

dealing with Rama are the most successful. They are too compressed, too briefly allusive….The result

is much loss by omission and much loss by compression. Many of the best episodes of the Ramayana

are quite omitted by Kalidasa….Other fine episodes are so briefly alluded to as to lose their

charm……There is therefore, real matter for regret in the fact that so great a poet as Kalidasa should

have treated it in a way not quite worthy of it or of himself.” Rhyder.

67 “The aerial view of India, described in terms of poetry richly dyed in romance, has won the

appreciation of every reader.” K. Krishnamurthy, Kalidasa, pp. 82 “It provides an excellent contrast

between the methods of the two poets. While the narrative of Valmiki is crude and simple, that of

Kalidasa is brilliant with high-wrought imagery.” M.R.Kale, Raghuvamsa, pp. XXVII

68 See the chapter for an in-depth analysis of Canto XIII.

69 Ramopakhyana of Mahabharata was earlier to Uttarakanda of Valmikiramayana. Brokington,

Righteous Rama, pp.

70 Only one sacrifice, the Putrakameshti, was performed by Dasaratha. The Ramayana added

aswamedha sacrifice at a later time when horse sacrifice was revived.

71 In Bhattikavya, there is no appearance of divine person or payasam being distributed to the queens.

72 On the other hand, he gives planetary positions at the birth of Raghu. Raghuvamsa, III, 13

73 Rgveda is the earliest one to describe the adventures of Viswamitra. Rgveda, III.53

74 . ramapadankita mekhalasu, sitasnanapunyodakeshu, kilbishacchidam rajah, Meghadutam Purva

Megaha, 12

75 vanita vadhe ghrinam patrinasaha mumoca rahavah. Raguvamsa, XI.17

76 Earliest reference to Ahalya is found in Satapatha Brahmana. A.A. Macdonell, Vedic Index, pp. 8

95

77 Various inscriptions of Pravarasena and the Queen Prabhavati Devi of Vakataka kingdom mention

the phrases, ramaswami padamula, padankita etc.,

78 Mahabharata, Vanaparva, Chapter 99, Appendix 14.

79 In the light of Mahabharata’s reference, Parasurama’s episode must have been included in the

Ayodhyakanda of the original Ramayana.

80 Ramayana, III, 17, 10-12

81 VII.100.26

82 Winternitz, A.B.Keith, Jacobi, A.K.Warder, J.L.Brockington

83 Kambaramayana in Tamil, Bhaskararamayana and Mollaramayana in Telugu, Toruveramayana in

Kannada, Madhavakandaliramayana in Assamese, Krittivasaramayana in Bengali and Tulasidasa

Ramacaritamanasa in Hindi.

84 Ottakutan’s Uttarakanda in Tamil, Ranganatha uttararamayana , Tikkana nirvacanottararamayana

and Kankanti paparaju uttararamayana in Telugu, Yogindra and Tirumala vaidya uttararamayana in

Kannada , Ananta Kandali and Shankaradeva uttararamayana in Assamese.

85 H.B. Sarkar, The migration of the Ramayana story in Indonesia, Ramayana Traditions in Asia,

pp.120

86 ibid. pp.120

87 J.L.Brockington, Righteous Rama, pp 266

88 ibid, pp. 58

89 ibid, pp329

90 J.L.Brockington, Righteous Rama, pp 56

91 ibid, pp.319

92“ The real explanation of the weakness of the twelfth and the fifteenth cantos is, in our opinion, to be

sought elsewhere…the fourteenth canto is rather colourless.” M.R.Kale, Raghuvamsa, pp. XXXIV

Dr. Ryder says, “ There is , therefore, real matter of regret in the fact that so great a poet as Kalidasa

should have treated it in a way not quite worthy of it and himself.” Ibid.pp XXXIII

93 Dr. Ryder declares that Kalidasa did not dare to put himself “ in to direct competition with Valmiki”

and thus to challenge competition with him. Ibid, pp XXXIII

94 Kalidasa feels humble before Valmiki. Raghuvamsa, I, 1 and 2

95 Appendix III

96 Raghuvamsa, XIV,19

97 Ramayana, VI, 116.75,84-90

98 Raghuvamsa, XIV.18

99 Righteous Rama, 58

100 ibid. 314

101 ibid. 58

102 Raghuvamsa XIV.74, XV.31

103 Ramayana VII.

104 Raghuvamsa XV.13, 35

105 Righteous Rama, 319

106 Cyavana’s version is referred to by Ashvaghosha in his Saundarananda

107 Sita’s fire ordeal is one according to the editor of Yuddhakanda.

108 Mahabharata, Santiparvan, 149.62,

sruyate sambuke sudre hate brahmanadarakah,

jivito dharmamasadya ramat satyaparakramat.

109 Winternitz, History of Indian Literature, Vol. III. Part I. Pp. 51

110 Dr. C. Kunhanraja, Saradaranjan Roy, Kumudaranjan Roy place Kalidasa around 200B.C. William

Jones, Peterrson, S.P. Pandit, C.V. Vaidya, Chandrasekhara Pandey, Baladeva Upadhyaya, R. N.Apte,

R.D. Karmarkar, Hariprasad Sastri assign Kailidasa to 57 B.C. And finally waber, Macdonell, Vincent

Smith, Konow, Libich, Bolch, Winternitz, A.B. Keith, V.V. Mirasi, D.C. Sircar, K. Krishnamurthy,

A.K.Warder place him around 5th century A.D.

111 Waber, Macdonell, Vincent Smith Winternitz, A.B. Keith, D.C. Sircar, V.V. Mirasi.

112 Waber, History of Sanskrit Literature, Note on pp. 204

113 A.A. Macdonnel, A History of Sanskrit Literature, pp. 274

114 Vincent Smith, Early History of India, pp. 321

115 A.B.Keith, Sanskrit Drama, pp.146, 147

116 A.B.Keith, History of Sanskrit Literature, 80,82

96

117 Winternitz, History of Indian Literature, 54, 55

118 R.K.Mukherji, The Gupta Empire, pp. 103, Vincent Smith, The Oxford History of India, pp, 170

119 ibid, pp.47

120 Inscriptions of Early Guptas, Corpus Inscriptinum Indicarum, Mookherji. R.k. The Gupta Empire,

pp 37, 102

121 Vincent Smith, Early History of India, pp. 321

122 Winternitz, History of Indian Literature, Vol. III, Part I, pp. 55, 56

123 Waber, Vinscent Smith, Winternitz, Warder.

124 Winternitz, History of Indian Literature, Vol.III, part I, pp. 48

125 It is worth noting that no date of these poets and works is fixed finally beyond doubt even to this

day.

126 ibid, pp.44

127 ibid, pp.45 “ The mere fact that a Buddhist monk thus early conceived the plan of writing the legend

of the Buddha according to the rules of the classical Sanskrit epic shows how popular the Brahminical

artificial poetry must have become, at any rate by the fourth century A.D. and probably long before.”

A.A. Macdonell, A history of Sasnskrit Literature,

128 Nasik inscription of king Pulumayi ( 154 A.D.) and Girnar inscription of Mahakshatrapa

Rudradhaman (150 A.D.)

129 Winternitz, History of Indian Literature, Vol. III, part I, pp. 45

130 Inscriptions of the Early Guptas, Corpus Inscriptionum Indicarum, Vol. III, pp 182, and Alberuni’s

India, Vol. Ii, pp. 5-7

131 Pattan Copper Plate Grants of Pravarasena II of Vakataka dynasty was composed by one Kalidasa.

Inscrilptions of Vakatakas. C.I.I.

132 Vatsabhatti who composed the Mandasor inscription (472 A.D.) closely follows Kalidasa’s

Raghuvamsa, Meghaduta etc.,

133 Winternitz, A.B. Keith, A.K.Warder

134 Karmarkar, Kalidasa, pp.138

135 Mukherji R.K., The Gupta Empire, pp 130

136 Macdonell, A History of Sanskrit Literature, pp 274

137. Waber, History of Sanskrit Literature, pp. 204

138 Vincent Smith, Early History of India, pp. 321

139 Max Muller, India What can it teach us, “ I confess that I put forward one or two opinions, chiefly in

order to provoke opposition and controversy……..here again I was fully prepared for determined

opposition, nay I was anxious to provoke it by the decided tone with which I laid down the

chronological limits of the period…” pp.XIX

140 Waber, History of Sanskrit Literature, pp. 200

141 Waber, History of Sanskrit Literature, pp. 204

142 Cowell, Jonhston E.H. Buddhacarita, pp.XCV

143 V.A.Smith, The Oxford History of India, pp. 171

144 A.L.Basham, Wonder that was India. Pp 66

145 V.A.Smith, The Oxford History of India, pp. 171

146 Abhijnanasakuntala, V Act

147 Abhijnanasakuntala, V Act

148 Abhijnanasakuntala, V Act

149 Abhijnanasakuntala, II Act

150 Krishnamurthy, K., Kalidasa

151 V.A.Smith, Oxford History of India, pp 321

152 Macdonell A.A., Keith, A.B., Mirasi, V.V. Warder, A.K.

153 G.R. Nandargikar, Raghuvamsa, pp 181-213

154 G.R. Nandargikar, Raghuvamsa, pp. 179

155 E.H.Johnston, Buddhacarita, XCIV

156 Ibid. “ Indian poetry has a long road to travel before it reaches the perfect fusion of matter and

manner in Kalidasa.” LXXXIX

157 Negating the arguments of Prof. Jolly that long interval of time should have passed between the

composition of two cognate works, Kangle, in his Arthasastra says, “ There is no fixed criterion for

determining the interval of time separating an original work and another modelled on it. So far as

language is concerned, it is well known that Sanskrit has remained more or less static over all these

97

centuries, and it is difficult to periodise its literature on the strength of any growth of language

reflected in it.” Kangle, Arthasastra, Vol. III, PP. 96

158 Dasatam kalidasasya ke na bibhrati, idanimapi tasyarthan upajivatyami yatah. Gangadevi,

Madhuravijayam

159 E.H.Johnston, The Buddhacarita, XXXV-XXXVII

160 ibid. pp.

161 ibid, pp.

162 Nandargikar, The Raghuvamsa , pp.191

163 K.G. Shankar, I.H.Q. vol. I, 309

164 Ashwaghosa must be harping on the fact that Siva not only lost his composition at the sight of

Parvati, but also was carried away by anger to that extent of burning Madana; where as Buddha was

unmoved and was free from anger.

165 Saundarananda, I,26, 36, 59, Ashvaghosa’s reference to Raghu, Yayati etc., “ cannot be dismissed

as unimportant , as the kings refered to have been particularly glorified by Kalidasa and Aswaghosa

most probably made them the upamanas (as being quite welknown) to describe Sudhodana and his

surroundings etc., “ R.D. Karmarkar, Kalidasa, 10

166 Saundarananda, VII.36

167 Malavikagnimitra, II Act

168 Saundarananda, XVIII,63, 64

169 J.B.R.I. No. 1, pp 117

170 Bana, Harshacarita, I, 6

171 “ with out weighty grounds, one must not push aside the unanimous Indian tradition; else one

practices scepticism, not criticism.” H.Jacobi, ZDMC, 68,pp 605.

172 Subhash C. Kak, JORI, Baroda, Vol. 40, No. 1-2, pp.51-54

173 ibid

174 ibid

175 Indian Kavya Literature, Vol. III, pp. 123

176 “This means that the controversy can be resolved only by considering evidence within the Kalidasa

corpus itself.” Kalidasa and the Agnimitra problem by Subhash C. Kak, Journal of Oriental Institute,

Baroda, Vol.40, No.1-2, pp. 51-54

177 Karmarkar, Kalidasa,

178 Kalidasa and the Agnimitra problem by Subhash C.Kak, pp.51-54

179 The Age of Imperial Unity, pp.562, Manu III. 55-59,

180 Yatra naryah pujyante tatra ramante devatah.

181 Ramayana, Bombay Edition, VI. 16.9, Ramayana, North West Edition, II.37.24

182 Manu. V.147-149 . Na stri swatamtryam arhati.

183 ibid.IX.2-19, The Age of ImperialUnity, pp 563

184 The society in Ramayana, 209, Ramayana, Bombay Edition VII. 9.10

185 Ramayana, North West Edition III.2.23

186 Abhijnanasakuntala, V

187 Abhijnanasakuntala, V.22

188 ibid. V

189 ibid.III

190 Abhijnanasakuntala, II.17 ,vamah kulasya adhayah

V. 24, Atah parikshya kartavyam viseshat sangatam rahah, Evam atmakritamapratihatam capalam

dahati

192 Manu. IX.191

193 The Age of Imperial Unity,pp.346

194 Abhijnanasakuntala, VI, rajagami tasyartha samcaya ityetadamatyo likhitam.

195 The Age of Imperial Unity, pp. 567

196 ibid, 568

197 Manu. V.157, Note,

198 Kumara Sambhavam III.35,36,37

199 Mc Crindle and The Age of Imperial Unity, pp 564

200 ibid, 564

98

201 The society of the Ramayana, pp. 148

202 ibid, pp.148

203 Uttararamacarita, IV. Vishkambha

204 Concise History of ancient India, pp 155

205 Concise history of Ancient India, pp. 155

206 The Age of Imperial Unity, 578

207 Ramayana, North West Edition, V.6.6 and IV.23,19

208 Ramayana, VII. 42.21

209 Malavikagnimitra

210 Abhijnana sakuntala, VI.Pravesika, pasumaranakarmadaruno anukampa mridureva shrotriyah.

211 Queen Iravati in Malavikagnimitra

212 Ibid, Bahuso madah kila strijanasya visesha mandanamiti.

213 Manu. VII.47 and commentary on VII.52 ; Society of Ramayana, pp 172

214 Abhijnanasakuntala, II, Drishta doshamapi mrigaya kevalam guna eva savritta.

215 Raghuvamsa, IX. 74, nripateh nishiddhamapi….

216 Manu. VIII.323

217 Nandargikar, Raghuvamsa, pp. 152

218 Abhijnanasakuntala, V.

219 Vikramorvasiya, VI.

99

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Bhasam, A.L., Wonder that was India, Sidgwick & Jackson, London

Bhat, G.K., Appointment with Kalidasa, L.D. Institute, Ahmedabad

Bongard, G.M., Levin, Mauryan India, Sterling Publishing Pvt Ltd, Newdelhi

Brokington, J.L., Righteous Rama, Motilal Banarsidass, New Delhi

Hillbrandt, Kalidasa, Motilal Banarsidass, New Delhi

Jhonston E.H., Buddhacarita, Motilal Banarsidass, New Delhi

Kale, M.R, Kumarasambhava, Motilal Banarsidass, New Delhi.

Kale, M.R, Raghuvamsa, Motilal Banarsidass, New Delhi.

Kale, M.R. Abhijnanasakuntala, Motilal Banarsidass, New Delhi

Kale, M.R. Malavikagnimitra, Motilal Banarsidass, New Delhi

Kale, M.R. Uttararamacarita, Motilal Banarsidass, New Delhi

Kane, P.V. Uttararamacarita, Motilal Banarsidass, New Delhi

Kangle, Arthasastra, Motilal Banarsidass, New Delhi

Karmarkar, Kalidasa, Karnataka University Publications, Dharward

Keith, A.B., A History of Sanskrit Literature , Motilal Banarsidass, New Delhi

Keith, A.B., Sanskrit Drama, Motilal Banarsidass, New Delhi

Krishnamacariar, M, History of Classical Sanskrit Literature, Motilal Banarsidass, New Delhi

Krishnamurthy, K, Kalidasa, Motilal Banarsidass, New Delhi

Krishnamurthy, K, Kalidasa, Sahitya Akademi, New Delhi

Macdonell, A.A., A History of Sanskrit Literature, Motilal Banarsidass, New Delhi

Mirasi, V.V., Kalidasa, Popular Prakashan, Bombay

Moorty, Lakshmi Narasimha, C, Janakajanandam, Prashanthinilayam.

Mujumdar, R.C. The Age of Imperial Unity, Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan, Bombay

Mukherji, R.K., The Gupta Empire, Motilal Banarsidass, New Delhi.

Mukherji, R.K, Chandragupta Maurya and his times, Motilal Banarsidass

Muller, Max, India what it can teach us.

Muller, Max, A History of Ancient Sanskrit Literature, Chowkhamba Sanskrit

Nandargikar G.R, Raghuvamsa, Motilal Banarsidass, New Delhi

Nilakantha Sastry, K.A, Age of the Nandas and Mauryas, Motilal Banarsidass

aaaRuben, Walter, Kalidasa, Akademeie-Verlag, Berlin

Sastri J.L, Kundamala, Motilal Banarsidass, New Delhi

Sarkar, H.B. The migration of the Ramayana story in Indonesia, Ramayana Traditions in Asia, Sahitya Akademi, N

Singh, A.D. Kalidasa- A critical Study, Bharatiya Vidya Prakasan,New Delhi

Sinha, B.C, History of the Sunga Dynasty, Bharatiya Publishing House, Delhi

Smith, Vincent, Early History of India, Ramanand Vidya Bhavan, New Delhi

Smith, Vincent, The Oxford History of India, Oxford University Press, New Delhi

Vaidya, P.L., Valmikiramayana, Baroda Oriental Research Institute, Baroda

Valmiki, Valmikiramayana, Baroda Oriental Research Institute, Baroda

Vimalasurin, Paumacariya, Prakrit Text Society, New Delhi

Waber, History of Indian Literature, Chowkhamba Sanskrit Series Office, Vaaa

100

Warder, A.K., Indian Kavya Literature, Motilal Banarsidass, New Delhi.

Wilson, H.H., Vishnupurana and analysis of Puranas,

Winternitz, History of Indian Literature, Motilal Banarsidass, New Delhi

KALIDASA RAMAYANA

BY

DR. CHANNAPRAGADA

LAKSHMINARASIMHA MOORTY

SRI SATYA SAI INSTITUTE OF

HIGHER LEARNING

PRASANTHINILAYAM

515134

INDIA