365bet娱乐

From the general chaos and the consequent blind conjectures of many of the modern researchers, some of the Kashmirian poets and authors are saved by the great genius of Kalhana, and our author is fortunate enough to belong to that category. Kalhana's Rajatarangini contains distinct mention of one Udbhata whom from the authority of his (Kalhana's) commentators and from other circumstantial evidence we can definitely identify with the author of Kavyalamkarasarasangraha. (( i ) His place. Udbhata was evidently a born Kashmirian as his name clearly shews.' The name Udbhata is one of the class of names of authors such as Jaiyata, Kaiyata, Allata, Rudrata and Mammata who are acknowledged Kashmirians. He was also a resident of Kashmir as he was the Sabhapati of Jayapida, one of the kings of Kashmir.* (ii) His date. In the first place we can ascertain with precision that Udbhata came after Bhamaha and preceded Anandavardhana. Udbhata had written a commentary³ on Bhamaha and besides, the present work of his contains many distinct adaptations and verbal borrowings from Bhamaha's Kavyalankara.* Anandavardhana pointedly mentions Udbhata in more than one place, and we may conclude from his manner of referring that Udbhata was regarded 1 Compare G. Buhler's Report of a tour in Kashmir-J. B. B. R. A. S. Extra No. of 1877, PP. 64-65. 2. Cf. Rajtarangini, IV. 495, quoted below. 3. Udbhata's bhamahavivarana . 4. Instances in point may be seen here and there throughout the commentary.

by him as a venerable elderly author within memory of the people of those times. The times of Udbhata and Anandavardhana given by Rajatarangini are perfectly consistent with this our conclusion. Udbhata belonged to the reign of Jayapida (779-813 A. D.), and Anandavardhana flourished in the reign of Avantivarman (857-884 A. D.).' years between the careers of both these Alankarikas and the date of the end of Udbhata and the birth of Anandavardhana would still be much nearer each other. Thus it is quite possible, Udbhata might have lived within memory of the people of Anandavardhana's times. Thus there exists a difference of about 40 or 50 掳 (iii) Other particulars. origly little is known at present about the details of the private life of our author; and this is quite natural with the vast gulf of more than eleven hundred years between his and our own times. Man lives by his works. But the peculiar misfortune of Udbhata was that his works were enveloped in oblivion before his name, which had existed in the works such as kavyaprakasa, rasagangadhara and the like, to remind us of the individual; and until the present work, one of his numerous compositions, was discovered about 45 years ago,³ we were only wondering at the 1. anandavardhana has: - anyatra vacyatvena prasiddho yo rupakadiralamkarah sonyatra pratiyamanataya bahulyena pradarsitastatrabhavadbhirbhattodbhavadibhih | (dhvanyalokah - p. 108). Here tatrabhavadbhih pro- 1:1 (p. Hobably indicates that the person or persons thus referred to are remembered as living in the times of the writer. See also the other reference to Udbhata on p. 96, dhvanyaloka, 2. Kalhana mentions Udbhata and Anandavardhana in his Raja. tarangini thus:- vidvandinaralaksena pratyaham krtavatanah | bhobhududbhatastasya (jayapidasya ) bhramabhartuh samapatih || taranah - 4 .495 . muktah sivasvami kaviranandavardhanah | 1 pratham ratnakarascagatsamrajyevantivarmanah || tarangah-9-34 . 3. The credit of the find is due to G. Buhler who undertook his famous tour in Kashmir in 1875, and brought to light many valuable works on poetry, rhetorics and history of Kashmir. For further information see his Report on the tour to Kashmir, J. B. B. B. A. S. Extra No. of 1877.

importance given to his name and the school of thought installed by him, by such writers as H, and others. No mention of his parentage, his teachers, his friends or even his own name exists in this work, and without the commentary of Induraja we could not have learnt that the work belonged to the famous Alankarika Udbhata. The only reliable information about the life and activities of Udbhata is what is given to us by Kalhana in his Rajatarangini. Kalhana thus mentions Udbhata :- vidvandinaralaksena pratyaham krtavetanah | bhobhududbhatastasya ( jayapidasya ) bhumibhartuh sabhapatih || - Rajatarangini, IV. 495. From this we learn that Bhatta Udbhata was the Sabha pati or the Head of the assembly of Pandits, at the court of the Kashmirian king Jayapida. It appears from his present work that he was a profound grammarian. A hundred thousand Dinaras per day seem to be too exhorbitant a tax on the treasury of the king even for those days of unbounded wealth. Possibly Udbhata was not going to the court of the king every day but once in many days or months; and the remuneration of Laksha Dinaras probably pertained to the day when he attended the court. Whatever the case might be, we need not at this time either envy or ridicule the learned man and the author for being the recipient of such a gift. In this connection we can only overlook the unjustifiable remarks made by Buhler upon Udbhata. He says:-"The oldest text books on alankara, those of Bhamaha and Bhattanayaka, have been lost, but a great number are still extant, the earliest of which belong to the times of King Jayapida, 779-813 A. D. One of these, the Alankarasastra of Bhatta Udbhata, I found, together with a commentary 1. The text of Bhamaha has now been discovered, and we find it. printed as an appendix to Prataparudrayasobhushana, a modern work on poetics, edited with copious notes and introduction by Rao Bahadur K. P. Trivedi, B. A., in the Bomhay Sanskrit series, No. LXV,

of Pratihara Induraja, in Jesalmir. Of this Bhattodbhata Kalhana says that he was Jayapida's Sabhapati, or Chief Pandit, and that he was paid daily a lakh of Dinaras. It is to be regretted that the recipient of such munificent pay did not write a more extensive book, and did not give us extracts from contemporaneous poets. He has only composed a short treatise on Alankaras or ornaments to be used in poetry, and most egotistically takes his examples from his own work, a Kumarasambhava". It was not the fault of Udbhata if his works did not survive till the age of our modern researcher; still less was it his fault if the researcher had remained blind to Induraja's statement that Udbhata had written 'a gloss on Bhamaha' or even if after reading the statement, had refused to admit the 'Gloss on Bhamaha' as a 'book'. Udbhata Bhatta certainly does not deserve such a mention in a ridiculous tone if he did not dream in his time that his insertion of examples from contemporaneous poets would prove of great value to the researchers that were destined, eleven hundred years later, to wield the fate of writers like him in their hands. It was the practice of very many writers on poetics to give their own verses as illustrations. Dandin, Bhamaha, Rudrata, Jagannatha and many others have done the same more or less. Nay, the great Alankarika Poets seemed even to think it a matter of pride to have been able to give examples of their own composition in illustration of the several items of poetics. 1