Ksemendra - The
Peoples' Poet
by Prof. K. N. Dhar
SANSKRIT poets and literary
luminaries have been often accused of oriental
hyperbole. It may be conceded that by and large
such devotees of Muse did indulge in some kind of
exaggeration which became naseating at times;
such kind of poetic fancy becomes pronounced when
they had to extol their patrons, heroes or even
their beloveds. Kings whose munificence made such
kind of poets as mercenaries, so to say, have been
equated with the lord of the gods - Indra, while
they bad no intrinsic merit of their own. People
at large have been by-passed and no direct
reference has been made to them. Even the prince
among poets Kalidasa has revelled in the
description of Raghu or Dilipa but has forgotten
altogether his subjects over whom they ruled. Aja
sheds torrents of tears for his beloved wife
Indumati, but not a single drop has been reserved
for the underdog whom he exploited to live in
luxury.
Happily for us, a
Kashmiri Brahmin "Ksemendra" by name has
striven to wash off this stigma attached in
general to Sanskrit poets and has tried his
versatile pen on the people in general. This is
not a mean achievement in the context of the
standards and norms of poetry-writing prevalent at
that time. Even the Rhetoricians had laid it down
that the hero of a Mahakavya should be a god,
saint or a man of exceptional attainments. To rise
in revolt against such time-honoured conventions
needs self-confidence of highest order. Ksemendra
did not err in his duty towards his brethren and
though being a rebel did initiate a very healthy
trend in the sanskrit literary tradition. He made
heroes and heroines of ordinary mortals in flesh
and blood - the courtesan, the clerk, the miser
and many others culled from ordinary life. He did
not believe in portraying the ideal, at the same
time not being averse to it. He in a most
realistic manner could feel the ground underneath
his feet. The throbs, sighs, sobs, joys and sorrow
of the man in the street have been woven in
dexterous verse pulsating with innate sincerity by
him only to point out that the distance between
the "ideal" and the "actual"
needs to be bridged, and perfection being an adage
only found in text books on morality,
approximation to that ideal should guide us as to
the inherent merit or otherwise of the people of
whom he was one.
In an extant reference to
Ksemendra found in Kalhana's Raja Tarangini, his
talent as a poet has been praised but his acumen
for historicity played down:
<verses>
"Because of somewhat
carelessness, not a single fraction of the
Ksmendra's Nrpavali is free from blemishes, even
though it is the work of a poet."
Kalhana having seen the
"list of kings" could glean mistakes in
it from the point of view of a chronicler, but
unfortunately this book was lost to the posterity,
hence no judgement whatsoever can be passed on it
except relying on Kalhana who acknowledges
Ksemendra's right to be a poet. However, in the
Colophon to the 'Samaya Matrika', Ksemendra has
written that he finished that work during the
reign of Ananta in the 25th year of the Laukika
era. Again in "Suvratta - Tilakam" he
reiterates that he wrote in the reign of king
Ananta and finally in 'Dasavataracaritam' he says
that he finished this assignment in the reign of
Kalasha, son of Ananta, the year being 41 Saptarsi
era. So it is abundantly clear that he did at
least see the rule of two kings- Ananta and his
son Kalasha. Again in his 'Bharatamanjari' he has
alluded to his being the pupil of Abhinavagupta
from whom he learnt Alamkara Shastras. The date of
this shaiva philosopher and commentator -
Abhinavagupta cannot be later than 1014 A.D.
because he wrote his bigger commentary on the
Pratyabhijna Darshana in 1014 A. D. At that time
Ksemendra studied at his feet. So we can safely
assume that Ksemendra must have been born at least
20 or 25 years before this date so as to develop
his comprehension in receiving the tuition from
Abhinavagupta. Hence his date of birth c n roughly
be placed in the last quarter (towards its end) of
the 10th century. His explicit mention of Ananta
and his son Kalasha only might give some clue as
to his death or retirement from creative
literature. He does not mention any other king
after Kalasha which proves that he was not
destined to see the reign of the successor to
Kalasha. The year in which he finished the "Dasavatarcaritam"
has been given as 41 Saptarsi era which
corresponds to 1066 A. D. After this date he
either sought respite from literary pursuits or
was cut short in life by death. He went to
Tripuresha mountain for spending his old age there
and probably breathed his last at the Ashrama he
had built over there. King Kalasha reigned from
A.D. 1073 - 1089 and it can fairly be assumed that
Ksemendra cast off his corporal frame after A D.
1066 and not in any case later than A.D. 1089.
Between these two limits his date of death can be
cogently placed. This Tripuresha or Tripureshvara
was held in great reverence in olden days as
Kalhana alludes repeatedly to it for its sanctity.
King Avantivarman also passed his last days on
this Tirtha. Nilamata purana also mentions it as a
place of pilgrimage. This has been identified as 'Triphar' on route to Mahadeva shrine, some 4
miles from the headworks of the present 'Harvan'
to the North-East A stream known as Tripuraganga
is still visited by the piligrims going to
Mahadeva which flows close to modern Triphar. Even
though it has lost its fame now, yet Shrivara has
mentioned about a 'Annasattra' started by king
Zain-ul-Ab-Din (Bud Shah) at this Tirtha. This may
be the permanent 'Langar' of those days started
for feeding the needy and might prove that during
the Muslim rule also it had retained its renown as
a holy place.
Ksemendra unlike other
Sanskrit poets does not feel shy of publicity. In
the colophons of his various works he acquaints us
fully with his lineage; piecing together all these
facts given by the author himself, we can
conveniently build his family tree. His
grandfather's name was 'Sindhu' being the son of 'Narendra'
a minister of Jayapida, grandson of Lalitaditya.
He was a very strong and
benevolent king of Kashmir and was named
Vinayaditya also especially on his coins. His
father's name was Prakashendra. He seems to have
been born in affluence as the family surname of 'Indra'
most eloquently testifies to. His father was of
very liberal disposition and made handsome gifts
to Brahmins. He subscribed to Shaiva cult hence
installed many Shiva lingas at Svayam near
Nichihama in present Handwara Tehsil, and spent
some 25 lakh rupees for endowment purposes. Like
his father Ksemendra also built an Ashram at
Triphar and retired there in his old age. His son
was 'Somendra' and being talented like his
versatile parent wrote an introduction to the
"Avadana-Kalpalata".
Fortunately for us, the
family tree of Ksmendra unmistakably illustrates
that this family had preference for Sanskritic
names and not local names, whose meaning at
present cannot be made out like those of Kalhana,
Bilhana and Mamatta, etc. "Khema" in
Sanskrit means "eternal happiness"' and
Indra means a "lord". So the name taken
together means "Lord of eternal happiness,
which he really was, as his compositions fully
portray. He did not confine this happiness only to
himself but dispensed it profusely among his
fellow-countrymen by composing humorous skits and
witty character sketches in "Deshopadesa"
and "Narmamala". He lived perfectly up
to his name.
His versatile genius has
flowered in many directions. Dr. Keith called him
a polymath while Dr. Stein' has appended the
epithet polymister with his name. This tribute
goes a long way in establishing that he did not
confine himself to a single form of literary
expression but tried his pen over many other forms
with equal force and effect. However, in all
humility he calls himself 'Vyasadasa' the servant
of Vyasa of Mahabharata fame. Knowledge has given
him humility in every sense of the word. Even
though like Vyasa he was a prolific writer, yet he
refrains from equating himself with him; he does
scale the virgin heights of literary expression,
yet does not boast about this but ascribes it to
the blessings of Vyasa whose slave he becomes
willingly. The ego in him remains subdued as
should be the case with every literary giant.
However, it is to be
conceived rightly that though Ksemendra's father
was a devout Shaiva and he himself received
tuition from Abhinavagupta - a Shavitie stalwart -
yet he got converted to Vaishnavism by the efforts
of Somapada. It also seems that he had more
respect for this Somabhagvata than even for
Abhinavagupta. Moreover, he kept his mind open and
studied Bhuddism also. Perhaps his awake intuition
first of all thought of including Buddha among the
ten incarnations of Vishnu. Some faint echoes of
ridiculing Shaivism can also be gleaned from his
compositions especially in 'Deshopadesha' and 'Naramamla'.
But despite all his flirations with Shaivism,
Vaishnavism and Bhuddism, he was a firm believer
in the religion of Shrutis (Vedas) and Smritis.
Before we proceed to
discuss his literary acumen as a polymath, it
seems pertinent to refer to a controversy raised
by Prof Peterson regarding the identity of
Kesemendra and by mistake confusing him with
Kshemraja - the renowned commentator of Shaiva
lore. However, on second thoughts he revised his
earlier opinion, and in this way the dust raised
by this confusion got settled. Perhaps this wrong
inference is due to the fact that both these
Kshemaraja and Ksemendra acclaim Abhinavagupta as
their teacher. Ksemendra has provided a veritable
hint as to his real identity as much as he
prefixes the epithet "Vyasadasa"
invariably with his name while Kshemaraja does not
have any such appellation. The latter is silent
about his pedigree but the former has written
profusely about his lineage. Hence it can be
easily understood that the two have had separate
identity.
Broadly speaking
Ksemendra's immense literary activities can be
divided into four distinct traits:
a) As a condenser of very
lengthy epic -literature and other religious
Kavyas.
b) As a Historian.
c) As a satirist.
d) As a writer on Rhetoric, poetics and metres.
Under the first head, his
summaries of Ramayana, Mahabharata, Brhatkatha of
Gunadya, 'Deshavatarcharita' and 'Baudha-vadanakalpalata'
are note worthy.
By epitomizing the
Brhatkatha written originally in paishachi, he did
a great service to the literary tradition of
Sanskrit literature. The original having been
lost, but Ksemendra's translation into Sanskrit
has served admirably to retrieve that irreparable
damage, and so he is looked upon as the originator
rather than the translator of this famous
story-1iterature. Soma Deva Bhatta also prepared a
second version of Brhat Katha in Sanskrit after
him which proves that this kind of literature on
the pattern of Arabian Nights had become very
popular with the people.
Brhat Katha Manjari deals
with amors and heroism of various kings especially
the king Udyana. It has nineteen Lamabakas
(cantos). The poetry employed is not of high order
and in the words of Dr. Buhler may be called
"verified prose". Ramayana Manjary and
Mahabharata Manjari are obviously the shorter
versions of Ramayana and Mahabharata - the epic
literature of India respectively. In the latter a
glaring omission is perceptible. He has altogether
omitted the chapters 342-353 of the Shanti Parva.
On a perusal of the Ramayana Manjari it is quite
clear that he follows Valimiki in a most faithful
way and has even alluded to minor incidents be it
by a single phrase or a single sentence. So, how
this striking omission can be explained? Perhaps
in the eleventh century the Shantiparva did not
form the part of Mahabharata and might have been
interpolated subsequently.
One fact comes to surface
while discussing the Manjari literature of
Ksemendra. He retains the original name of the
text he has chosen for being summarized and
appends the word 'Manjari' to it. "Manjari"
might mean a sprout, cluster of blossoms, a
flower-bud or a creeper. In this way he has very
intelligently suggested that his smaller edition
is like a creeper to the original and imposing
tree of Ramayana, Mahabharata etc. He has like a
deft gardener pruned the extraneous and redundant
foliage around these trees and carved out of these
a cluster of blossoms, even though smaller in
volume, but all the more prettier in appearance.
As a translator of Brhat Katha, his translation
from Paisachi into Sanskrit was definitely
subservient to the contents of the original. He
could not take any liberty with it; with such
shortcomings even, Ksemendra's mastry over
Sanskrit is unblemished. So it is wrong to judge
his poetic prowess from his "Manjari"
literature. His independent works only can be the
touch-stone to test his talents as a poet. We will
come to this point later.
'Baudhavadana-kalpa-lata',
is a collection of Jataka tales. On the authority
of the poet's son "Somendra" Ksemendra
composed only 107 Pallavas (chapters), to which
his worthy son added one more, making it the
auspicious number of 108. Unfortunately the first
40 Chapters of this compendium were lost but
luckily were retrieved from its Tibetan
translation, when Shakya - Shri a Kashmiri Pandit
presented a copy of it to the Lama of Tibet in
1202 A.D. He got it translated into Tibetan some
seventy years after i.e. 1272 A.D. Ksemendra also
acknowledges the debt of one 'Virya Bhadra' an
authority on Buddhistic texts who assisted him in
composing this treatise.
"Dashavatarcharita"
as the name suggests contains anecdotes regarding
various incarnations of Vishnu; though Ksemendra
does display a rare kind of ingenuity in dealing
with this religious topic, yet it cannot be termed
to be his original work; first 9 cantos are
definitely derived from Puranas. Novelty of
conception is discerned in the 7th canto wherein
"whole of the Ramayana is narrated with
Ravana as the central figure". The result is
quite happy and vividness of description adds to
its charm. This novelty of conception is further
more witnessed in his extolling Buddha as an
incarnation of Vishnu. The inherent attitude of an
Indian thinker believing in synthesis is seen at
the work here. Herein the Hindu view of life
assimilating all that is good from any source
whatever, has come in handy to the poet. So, the
rebel against Hinduism as such - the Buddha has
been admitted to the fold of Hindu pantheon which
proves not only the catholicity of Hindus but also
their wakefulness.
When the symbol of
revolt-Buddha was equated with Rama, Krishna etc.
the edge of proselytisation started by his
followers got blunted. The wind was taken out to
their sails, not by force, not by persecution
either, but by owning him. In this way Hindus got
one more incarnation and propitiated him in the
form he detested the most. His followers
definitely stood to lose in the bargain while
Hindus gained everything - their culture, their
way of thinking remaining in tact. Imperceptible
erosion took place in the other camp and
consequently this very religion had to either get
amalgamated in the Hindu fraternity, or live in
self-exile.
As a historian no
estimate of his can be built as his "Nrpavali"
(the list of Kings) has been lost even though
Kalhana did consult it for writing, his Tarangini.
However, Kalhana has not been fair to him. He
admires his acumen as a poet, but derides it as a
historian. However, it is to be conceded that
Kalhana while enumerating the sources of the
historical data on which he built his chronicle,
does mention his "list of kings" which
must have commanded some respect in his time, and
to justify the writing of his "Tarangini"
pointed to the defects in the former "Nrpavali".
In this connection it is to be remembered that
even though Ksemendra undertook to write the
"list of kings" but his heart definitely
lay with the underdog. So he treated it in a slip-
shod manner. In course of time, Nature respecting
his conviction, consigned the book to some
forgotten corner, hence was lost. His innate
progressive outlook would have compiled a "Janavali".
The "List of people" instead of
"The list of kings". Perhaps to atone
for this omission he wrote a number of books which
do definitely come under the caption "Janavali".
Royal patronage he did not want as he was
sufficiently affluent himself, so could not bring
himself to cater to the moonish caprices of kings.
Kalavilasa may be
considered the best work from the fertile pen of
Ksemendra. This book consists of ten cantos and in
the very first canto "Muladeva" the arch
cheat is introduced and the rest of the book is
devoted to the tips given by him to his pupil
Chandragupta the caravan leader's son. Each canto
deals with vanity, greed description of
courtesans, the character of the clerk, arrogance
the description of Music, description of various
cheats, and lastly exposition of all the arts. As
is clear from the titles of cantos, the poet does
not refrain from exposing the weakness inherent in
the society at that time. The cheats, courtesans,
Kayasthas and goldsmiths epitomizing the deceit in
themselves corrupt the society with the aid of
vanity, greed and arrogance. His play on the word
('mud') arrogance which was spelt as ('dum')
restraint in the Krta - age deserves mention. In
Kali - age the sequence of syllables has changed
places 'dum' becoming 'mud'.
Moreover, useful
information about the currency in vogue at that
time is also given in this book. While describing
the character of miserly trader he calls him a a
thief in broad day light. Having plundered the
customers by guile or flattery during the day, he
very reluctantly parts with three cowries for
house-hold expenses. It seems clear that the
cowries were in use as a medium of currency in his
time - and that also of the lowest denomination.
He calls cowries as a (Shvetika) being of white
colour also. Narrating the novel deceptive ways of
gold smiths who have faulty balances for weighing
gold and possess sixty four arts of cheating the
people, he alludes to their birth, and says that
they were previously nibbling at the Meru mountain
as mice and cursed by gods for this insolence were
born as goldsmiths on this globe.
The title of this
composition means the charm or pastime of arts-
the art of deception, cheating, enticing,
seduction, and robbery etc.
About the depraved woman,
he has this castigation:
<verses>
"Eluding her own
husband like a fawn, tasting the hospitality of
another tree (not her own husband's), by nature a
low-born vamp, displays false coquetry, crooked
she-serpent, can be faithful to none".
In the same vein the
prostitute is condemned as
<verses>
"In this way, having
many hearts, many tongues, many hands, and many
tricks of seduction, in reality without
truthfulness; no body can know the prostitute in
essence."
About the innocence of
men he has this satirical compliment:
<verses>
"The astrologer
calculating in the sky as to when the moon will
enter its sixteenth mansion, does not know
anything about his wife who is attached to the
amors of various serpents (bad charactered
men)."
The Kayastha (the scribes
clerk) who held very important post in old Kashmir
and like a 1eech drank the blood of people has not
escaped his chastisement.
<verses> "The handwriting (of
Kayastha) is crooked, (fraudulent, so that the
actual entries made into his books are not
deciphered) looking like the snares of the
death-god. The Kayasthas sit on the file of the
birch bark (files) like serpents in a charmed
circle (drawn by a conjurer)."
Samayamatrika may be also
called the finest composition from the versatile
pen of Ksemendra. Herein the poet lays bare the
seductive amors of prostitutes and their enticing
acumen. In the colophon to this book the poet
calls it ('subhashitam') by which its didatic
import is suggested. The caption of the book a
compound consisting of ('Samaya') time and ('Matrika')
mother, when taken together, may mean the
"mother of the time" in that age. It was
not the chaste or the virtuous lady but the
ensnaring vamp - the prostitute who ruled over the
hearts of men. The times were not in any way
flatteringly punctuated with piety but besmeared
with sinful conquetries of the prostitutes; by
bringing them to the fore and also alluding to
their ghastly end, the poet does reform the
society. Some critics have found Ksemendra guilly
of low-taste, vulgarity and only narrating the bad
points in the society. However it is to be
remembered in this context that Ksemendra in the
first instance does not claim to be a religious
preacher. He writes what he actually sees and
feels. If the society was rampant with vulgarity,
low taste and other evils, how could the poet be
blind to these? The degradation in the society
could not have remained hidden even if Ksemendra
had tried to make the use of
"idealistic" rather than the
"realistic" approach to life. The filth
and the mud in the society would after all raise
its head had Kesmendra covered it with the sweet
smelling roses of his imagination even. By
screening these from public view would have all
the more multiplied their intensity, hence by
portraying these, the society at large hanging its
head in shame, could have thought of reform in
right earnest. Hence the poet's intention is to
reform and in no way to present the deformation of
society. Hence the use of the ('subhashitam') at
the end of book is quite justified. Negatively if
the darkness is explained in full detail, the
positive reaction to it would be light, more
light. As the little of the book suggests, it is a
compound of 'Times' and 'Matrika' (mother) object
of respect. In a sarcastic manner the author wants
to convey that the harlot is the "mother of
the times" or more respected and sought after
individuals in the society, while actually the
Matrikas should have been propitiated. The moral
and mental fibre of the people at that time was so
base that instead of engaging themselves in "Matrika
Pujananam" they wasted time and money in
enjoying prostitutes. Hence in the very beginning
of this treatise, Ksemendra very rightly says:
<verses>
Moreover, towards the end
of this composition Ksemendra himself justifies
the title by saying:
<verses>
"In course of time
(by the curse of the time) that (Kankali) - the
mother was transformed into an artificial beauty
by Kalavati, associating this treatise with her
name, I, Ksemendra has arranged it (into
cantos)". This book also furnishes
geographical data about the old salt route (salt
has been always imported into the Valley) and a
hospice named 'Panchala-Dhara-Matha' on it. Later
on this very route and hospice were rennovated by
the Mughals connecting the Valley with the plains
via Pira-Panchal range. This book of verses is
divided into eight cantos (Samayas). Herein the
initiation of one 'Kankali' into the hierarchy of
prostitutes and her various sojourns have been
described. The agent for introducing her to a
senior-in-trade grown up lady- hence unmarkatable
is naturally the hair-dresser- among men the
barber (hair-dresser) is the most wicked.
Charucharya is actually a
century of verses in Aaushtubha metre. According
to the author the main purpose of writing it is to
teach law and polity by way of a moral couched in
the first line of the verse and followed by an
illustration in the second. The illustrations are
mainly drawn from epics and Puranas.
'Deshopdesha' contains
updeshas (advice) in eight cantos regarding his
innate feelings about the customs and notorious
characters in the society. In the opening verses
of this book the author craves for the indulgence
of the readers in not construing any other meaning
into his use of biting sarcasm, but only to bear
with him, because he would like to reform the
society through this medium:
<verses>
"Being ashamed very
much and not goaded by the defects (in the
society), it is my attempt to reform the people
through mirthful laughter."
The characters he has
chosen for his chastisement are the villain,
the miser, harlot, the bawd, the sexy rogue; the
Gouda students having come to Kashmir for
receiving tuition and the old man's marriage etc.
The harlot epitomizes in
his words: -
<verses>
"In her speech
honeyed-sweetness, in her heart the blade of a
razor, the prostitute is like a sharp edge of an
axe ready to cut at the roots of her
paramours."
Even though being at the
right side of sixties, she polishes her face with
beauty - aids like a girl in teens, verily at the
commencement of the iron age, she must have taken
nectar along with crows.
About the foreign
students especially from Gauda Pradesha (Bengal),
he has this left-handed compliment:
<verses>
"He demands more vendibles, but gives very little as the price, so
the vendor in the morning stands before him like a
local Kali (to recover the balance). "
Presumably the student
given to vile practices could not be coaxed into
paying the actual price being under the influence
of liquor on the preceding night. He would have
cooked up a brawl and even wounded the vendor with
his knife.
Moreover, the psychology
of a miser has been graphically woven by him in
these words:
<verses>
"The miser seeing a
relation of his having come to his house of his
own will, under the excuse of an altercation with
his wife vows not to take anything."
When the host is
observing a fast, more so under protest, how could
the guest expect hospitality there. So, he takes
up to his heels and in this way, the miser gets
rid of him. Furthermore, Ksemendra tries to
philosophise on his over-all behaviour :
<verses>
"The dry-as-dust
miser's words can never be sweet. How can be
loveliness on his face when there is no salt even
in his house-hold." Herein, the poet has
played on the word 'salt' which in its abstract
form may mean beauty also.
In this way, he has not
spared any such despised character in society.
The Kashmiri Bhatta (Pandit
as known now) having fallen from his high pedestal
and addicted to vice has been painted by him as
<verses>
"The initiated
Bhatta (Kashmiri Brahmin) bent upon taking liquor,
being addicted to Vamachara by which the pride of
his own clan has been set at naught, with a plate
of fish in his hand, approaches the house of his
teacher (for reading scriptures)."
This description of a Bhatta very lucidly brings home to our mind the
levity obtaining in the highest caste at that
time. Having forsaken the right path of worship
and taking to Vamachara, he has to observe the 'panchamkaar'
(five MS) rule, and is so bashless that he does
not care two hoots for the prestige of the
community to which he belongs.
The old man's infatuation
for a young girl has been very aptly summed up by
the author as follows :
"The old man begs
for a virgin (in marriage) like a miser for
wealth." The undertone in this simile is
purposely condensed by the author by comparing the
lust for a virgin of a dotard with the lust for
money by the miser - who will never use it but
simply keep it imprisoned in his coffers, only to
feed his eyes upon.
'Narma-Mala' or a garland
of humour and wit is actually a complement to the
'Deshopdesha.' It is divided into three Parihasas
(Jokes). The main target in these is the Kayastha-
clerk- who is painted most black. He revelles in
dismantling temples, teasing Brahmins, and
encouraging bribery. His life full of vice lands
him into the prison ultimately, and all his
ill-gotten riches and property are confiscated.
His end is most tragic.
The "Then" and
"Now" of the Kasyastha has been very
wittily condensed in the following verse:
<verses>
"(In former days)
his wife used to drink the begged scum in a broken
and second-hand stone bowl. She now takes the
musk-scented wine in silver goblets.
Under the fourth head,
Ksemendra as a rhetorician and writer on poetics
and metrics composed Kavi Kanthabharana (The
necklace of a poet) and Auchitya Vicharaeharcha
(an account of propriety ) and Suvratta tilakam (
the crest of good metres ) deserves special
mention. As the titles of these compositions
reveal, the first is a short treatise on the
making of a poet for which divine as well as human
effort is necessary. The second declares the
"propriety' as the soul of poetry. The
age-long predominance of Rasa (sentiments) has
been subordinated by him to Auchitya (propriety).
The third obviously is a work on metres. Twenty
four metres are described, discussed and
illustrated by him in all.
Besides these, a host of
books on other subjects has been ascribed to
Ksemendra. Late Pt. Madhusudan Kaul Shastri
enumerates as many as thirty one compositions from
his versatile pen.
However, to build his
towering image as a peoples' poet, only such uncontroversial treatises as have been classified
under different heads earlier, are sufficient.
Without mincing words, it
would be expedient to judge him as a poet first
and afterwards the subject he chose as a vehicle
for his poetic talent will merit discussion. The
most accepted definition of poetry from Eastern
point of view is by Kavi Raja Vishwanatha when he
says that even a single sentence containing Rasa (flavour
or sentiment of relish) may be called poetry. Further to pin-point the importance of Rasa he
defines it as <sanskrit text> which tinkles
or which is relished is called Rasa. With other
constituents such as 'embellishments',
'qualities', etc, Rasa is acknowledged by one and
all as the soul of poetry. Herein obviously the
emphasis is on the content of poetry.
Ksemendra himself defines
poetry as containing "Auchitya"
propriety. According to him propriety has been
defined as :
"An embellishment is
a real embellishment when applied at the proper
place, and Gunas (merits) are actually merits when
they up-bold the norms of propriety. So it is
clear that Ksemendra does not subscribe to Rasa
theory of poetry and makes bold to give his own
definition. He actually makes the poetry
purposeful. Furthermore in a poetic composition
when different Rasas (sentiments) are intermixed
propriety alone can preserve their flavour, if
this kind of discretion is not employed, then the
composition would only be a counterfeit mixture
of sentiments. The author lays emphasis on the
existence of propriety in each word, sentence,
figures of speech, verbs, syntax, gender, number,
adjective, tense and even on other outer limbs of
poetry (Kavyangas) i.e. environment, time,
intuition, thought and nomenclature.
Therefore the difference
between the Rasa school and the definition of
poetry given by Ksemendra is that the former is
subjective in essence and the latter is objective
in comprehension. The Advocates of Rasa did
definitely include propriety in merits and
impropriety with blemishes.
But Ksemendra like a
realist does mark the frontiers between the two,
because his judgment is objective. Before testing
his merit as a poet by his own standards or by
Esstern norms of criticism, it will be feasible to
define poetry and also the making of a poet from
western point of view also.
Wordsworth defines poetry
"nothing less than the most perfect speech of
man, that in which he comes nearest to being able
to utter the truth." Herein this celebrated
poet under-lines the truth which should deserve to
be the subject of poetry. Another famous poet
Shelley while defining poetry in a general way
takes it to be the expression of imagination.
Coleridge makes it as anti-thesis of science
having for its immediate object pleasure not
truth. Herein the emphasis is laid on the pleasure
which should flow from a poetic composition.
Thomas Carlyle declares poetry to be "musical
thought". This definition is perhaps in
consonance with that given by Dr. Johnson when he
says that "poetry is metrical
composition." Both these definitions pertain
to the form of poetry-other than prose. Edgar
Allan Poe also echoes the same feeling when
according to him poetry is "the rhythmic
creation of beauty."
W. H. Hudson sees poetry
"as an interpretation of life through
imagination and feeling."
However, from the perusal
of all these definitions it is clear that poetry
as such is a metrical composition pulsating with
imagination and feeling its goal being to
interpret the truth or to provide pleasure. In
this way the form of poetry being musical and
metrical and its content either the truth or the
pleasure, have been properly and proportionately
located. By comparing this definition with that of
the Indian critics it is patent that these are in
line with the protagonists of 'Rasa' theory which
definitely tinkles the emotions. With regard to
Ksemendra we have to note the didactic import in
his poetry which he proclaims from the house-top.
Therefore, the question arises whether a poet can
be a moral teacher. He has to translate his
feelings and emotions faithfully as they ooze
forth in his heart and to preach morality through
this medium is justified or not. To this knotty
problem Sir Philip Sidney provides a cogent
answer. In his "Defence of poetry" he
says that a poet is a 'maker'; the Indian
counter-part being 'Srishta' having the same
meaning. So, it can be safely inferred that the
poet does not express what already exists, but he
invents - precisely the 'ideal' for the imitation
of the reader in general. He (Sidney) further
contends that the world created by the poet is
surely better than what exists reality. In the
same way fiction sounds truer than the fact. The
contention of Sir Sydney to put squarely is, that
poet is actually a moral teacher, but Ksemendra
while admitting this in toto, does not believe in
his painting the ideal and thereby reform the
'actual'. He would like to proceed from the
'actual' like a revolutionary and would like the
reader to assess for himself 'what should have
been' from 'what it is.' What he preaches on
Morality is simply suggestive and not direct.
Perhaps his approach is more realistic than Sir
Sidney who would like us to go to the 'Real' via
'ideal'. Ksemendra believes in treating the 'Real'
with its imperfections, and all the time beckoning
us in undertones, and not directly, to have an eye
on the 'perfect ideal'. "What should not
be" can be very efficiently emphasized by
"what actually is."
His conviction about the
function of propriety in poetry comes to his succor in this dilemma. Propriety according to
him is nothing but a real representation of life
as it obtains. Had he painted it otherwise, it
would have amounted to impropriety. Hence his
candid portrayal of society is an illustration of
propriety in its all shades of meaning. He would
not like to pass on a counterfeit society for a
genuine one. He believes in calling spade a spade
and not confusing dross with gold. While
discussing the attributes of a poet, Ksemendra in
his 'Kavi Kanthabharna' has unambiguously laid
down that a poet-in-the making should not seek the
guidance of a logician or a grammarian because
they hinder the flowering of good poetry. He is
alive to the fact that good poetry should in no
case get fettered in grammatical technicalities or
the mental drill of logicians. It should flow like
an uninterrupted stream. Moreover, he even goes to
the extent of saying that a poet - in-the making
"should neither go a - begging nor stoop to
vulgarity in his narratives". His imaginative
faculty should not be wanting in anything and
should not fall below the established norms of
good-taste. So, it is clear that Ksemendra as a
teacher on poetry and also as a poet does strike a
happy mean between the precept and the practice;
for this he has chosen the vehicle of satire.
A satire has been defined
as a piece of writing which ridicules the follies
and wickedness of mankind, of a class of people or
of an individual. As has been made clear in the
preceding pages his emphasis is on the individual
- different units of society who are a veritable
cancer for its healthy growth. Hence his
chastiment pulsating with sarcasm and irony does
not border on vulgarity. It is a faithful
representation of life. It can safely be asserted
that his poetry is not a revolt against life in
any sense of the word. The moral standards as
should have been existent in the society - which
actually are not there - form the dirge of his
poetical compositions. Like Mathew Arnold he
believes that 'poetry is at bottom a criticism of
life.' Morality and ethical values do form an
inextricable woof and warp of the texture of
society, hence the poetry of revolt would be
revolt against life itself. So, he does not revolt
against it, but lays it bare with pungent sarcasm
and seemingly 'Mirthful laughter', only to relieve
its grim effect on his readers.
In the same way
Ksemendra's poetry cannot be a accused of being-
the poetry of paradox. In a paradox th e
self-contradictory or absurd element is somewhat
more pronounced than the truth it contains; our
poet does not believe in the 'parodoxical'
approach to poetry, but in its stead, prefers the
direct approach which is easier to comprehend. He
does not want us to solve riddles or puzzles.
Hence it is clear that
his 'satire' does not subscribe either to 'revolt'
or to 'paradox', in their stead, he transfers his
innate feelings to the reader without any
pretensions whatsoever.
It has been contended
that satire is best suited to prose. In it the
appeal is made to reason, judgment, "it
cannot be heightened by being garnished with an
appeal to emotion''. However, our poet has
employed the more difficult medium of poetry,
hence his task to produce the desired effect is
more arduous than those of the prose-writers in
this field. Perhaps for this very reason some
critics have called his poetry as versified prose.
As has been shown earlier, this is sheer injustice
to our poet. Like a true satirist he has to
subjugate his emotions to the compelling reality
around him. The wings of his imagination do get
clipped consequently, so his poetry may not touch
the high water-mark of Kalidasa - who has no such
shortcomings and his emotions are free to take any
direction whatsoever. Even then Ksemendra has
yoked his poetic prowess admirably well to the
exposition of the real by contrasting it with the
ideal. For a satirist the method of contrast is
indispensable. He may feel piqued at times with
the gulf between the real and his dreams, yet his
anger has to be screened under a mask of
'Mirthful-laughter' as Ksemendra would say
himself. The satirist has to don the mantle of a
moralist though he may not like it. His insistent beckoning to ideal - appealing to the sense of
right and wrong - unconsciously bestows on him the
status of a moral teacher. He cannot escape from
it. Hence, in his poetry the aesthetic content is
naturally subservient to the moral one. Even
having such discomfitures for the full flight of
his imagination, Ksemendra has tried his hardest
to introduce aesthetic pleasure into it according
to his own norms of propriety, as discussed
earlier. His satire does show the poet in him. His
compositions are even now relished with the gusto
of a lyric vibrating with emotions and have never
been treated as codes on Morality. Perhaps this
popular reaction to his satire is a sufficient
compliment to his genius as a poet of no mean
order.
The very first verse of
samaya Matrika introduces him as a poet by his own
right :
<verses>
"He who has
conquered three worlds by his exciting, stormy,
yet formless weapons; I salute him the
flower-bowed cupid, for his surpassingly wonderful
prowess'.
Whenever his imaginative
faculty is not under the curbing thumb of content,
or is free to take strides at his own will, he definitely touches the high water mark of poetic
fancy. The poet in him remains subdued not that he
lacks proper imagination, by the compelling nature
of the subject he has chosen, and the vehicle of
shloka metre which cannot admit of any elaborate
treatment because of its comparative shorter span.
His vocabulary is so rich that he looks like a
living Dictionary; hence he could readily and
easily weave a particular situation or feeling out
of the inexhaustible fund of words at his command.
Words flow from his pen spontaneously and at times
he does not feel diffident to use the local
Kashmiri words also, perhaps to give his
compositions a native colouring and flavour:
"The flute-player has the Veena and the
"tumbak" on his shoulders".
To make its Kashmiri
usage more emphatic, he also uses the word 'Nara'
with it. In this context many such Kashmiri words
even the idioms can be gleaned from his works e.g.
'Tala' in the sense of Sanskrit 'palater',
Gharaghara, reprenting the roaring sound of clouds
in Kashmiri. Not only this but even the Kashmiri
colloquial taunts and abuses have also been
reproduced by him faithfully in sanskrit.
To crown all his similes and other, figures of speech are not only
apt but also homely. He does not believe in
ethereal poetic fancy but has amply drawn from
daily life. His personal experience and
observation make his diction all the more
realistic. His delineation of nature:
<verses>
"The starry night
keeping vigil having become disgusted with the
fatigue caused by its sporting with the white rays
(off the moon), gradually gets emaciated, being anointed with the
morning dew, as if with
perspiration."
Describing Moonlight the
poet portrays a bewitching scene with its
enthralling effect with the help of very simple
words:
<verses>
''The lord of the night
(the moon) a white parasol of cupid, the unblurred
mirror made of crystal for the lady of
"space", the white Tilaka of the damsel
of Night, shone resplendently.
While describing the
beauty of the city (presumably Srinagar) he has to
say :
(In that city) where the
musical notes of the pretty swans is all the more
made sweeter by their devouring flesh
lotus-stalks, which (musical notes) getting
diffused in the lotus-groves sound like the
jingling of anklets of goddess Lakshmi.
About the content of
Ksemendra's writings, we have made it amply clear
that he chose the ordinary man or woman with his
or her all weaknesses as his subject. The choice
of such a subject was in itself revolutionary at
that time when fixed norms were laid in this
behalf by the Rhetoricians. Ksemendra not only
rebelled against such hackneyed, standards but
provided his own thesis for rhetorics and
criticism in 'Auchityavicharacharcha' and '
Kavikanthabharna'. He showed the path to
progressive trends in literature in those hoary
times when dogmatic approach was the order of the
day. Some ten centuries after him the humanily
woke to the necessity of ushering in progressive
outlook in literature, more especially after the
Russian revolution of 1919. In a way Ksemendra
combined in himself the characteristics of a
prophet and a poet. He brought down the poetry
from the ethereal heights to the matter of fact
and real dimensions.
The style which he
employs deserves some mention before we close this
paper. Style is defined as a mode of expression
and we shall have to examine as to how Ksemendra
acquits himself in this field. We know already
that he uses very simple words, avoids lengthy
compounds and ambiguous epithets. His appeal is
direct. He does not believe in traversing zigzag
when shorter routes are available; with the use of
simple straight and chiselled words he produces
the maximum effect. This is his immortal
contribution to Sanskrit literature. He lives to
the maxim propounded by Coleridge "best words
in best order" by any standards whatsoever.
Moreover, the mode of expression he employs has
his own indelible imprint on it. Regarding this
trait in style J. Middleton Murray has observed
"A style must be individual because it is the
expression of an individual mode of feeling."
Some sixty years after him another Kashmiri Soma
Deva Bhatta also tried his pen on epitomizing
Brhatkhatha; it can easily be understood from the
comparison of the two that Ksemendra has his own
style which could not be imitated by Soma Deva.
His own Kashmiri Retotician Vamana, a protaganist
of Riti School has said:
<verses>
"Riti is a special
arrangement of words; Riti is the soul of
literature."
Ksemendra's writings do
possess the "special arrangements of
words", he does not waste a single word, but
knows fully well "that these are two edged
tools, if not used well, these can bite" as
very aptly said by Anthony Trollope. Ksemendera's mastery over the language is perfect. He very
prudentially uses a particular word to project a certain context and meaning. His selection of
words is superb. T.S. Elliot has said "The
poet has not a "personality" to express
but a particular medium", which obviously
connotes style. Ksemendra's style is neither
artificial nor wanting in anything. It is to quote
Wordsworth - "Man speaking to man?" and
to make this definition more representative,
Ksemendra added the words "about the
man" to it.
These words represent
Ksemendra in all his shades. In his prolific
writings he performs the mental surgery of the
Man, locates the disease and points towards its
eradication. He with child-like innocence and
simplicity employs the most direct language only
to talk to man like a man, because his aim is to
beckon to him :
<verses>
"Alas, seeing always
the deer in the trap in the jungle, even then the
deerlings get into the crooked snares."
|