Ksemendra - The
Peoples' Poet
by
Prof. K. N. Dhar
Sankskrit 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."
|