Satirical works of Kshemendra (study)
by Arpana Devi | 2017 | 60,954 words
This page relates 鈥楽ummary of the Mattavilasam鈥� part of the study on the Satirical works of Kshemendra: an 11th century poet from Kashmir, who composed three satirical works. Kshemendra himself says that in composing the satirical works his only motive is to reform the mindset of the people.鈥擧e exposes all the vices and follies prevailing in the society with the intention to reform it.
Go directly to: Footnotes.
7.7. Summary of the 惭补迟迟补惫颈濒腻蝉补m
The 惭补迟迟补惫颈濒腻蝉补 (惭补迟迟补惫颈濒腻蝉补m) is the earliest known work of prahasana type. The work was composed by the Pallava king Mahendravikrama in the 7th century A.D. The work was first published in 1917 in the Trivandram Sanskrit series by the Late Ganapati Shastri. According to the norms of prahasana, the work contains only one Act. The plot of the work is laid in 碍腻帽肠墨.
The work begins with the drunken 碍补辫腻濒颈苍 Satyasoma and his wife Devasoma, who wander tavern to tavern seeking for more liquor. After a while, Satyasoma discovers that he has left his sacred scull bowl somewhere else. He suspects that the skull bowl must have been stolen either by a dog or by a Buddhist monk. Both of them begin to search the bowl. In the meantime, the Buddhist monk 狈腻驳补蝉别苍补 arrives in front of the 碍补辫腻濒颈苍. The 碍补辫腻濒颈苍 starts arguments with the monk. The 碍补辫腻濒颈苍 once again believes that the monk鈥檚 bowl is his skull bowl. Then a 笔腻艣耻辫补迟补 appears and offers to settle the dispute with a hope of gaining Devasoma for himself. But they cannot settle the problem and decide to go to the court. At the moment, a madman arrives with a skull-bowl which he recovered from a stray dog. Satyasoma recovers his skull-bowl from the madman and the play ends herein.
In the play, satirical element is observed in the criticism of the fallen practices of different sects prevailing in the contemporary society. The author satirically exposes the evil aspect of religion. Buddhism, 碍腻辫腻濒颈办补 Saivism, 笔腻艣耻辫补迟补s are satirized by the author for their deteriorating state. The play satirizes those who give their lives in the name of monkhood but are not able to leave worldly pleasure. In the play, the 碍补辫腻濒颈苍 believes that the Buddhist mendicant has stolen his skull bowl because it contains roasted meat. Herein, the author criticizes the life style of the Buddhists.
For the Buddhist monk, Buddha has ordained a comfortable life for them, but he cannot understand why he has not allowed alcohol and women for monks鈥�
Kinnukhalu str墨parigraha岣� sur膩p膩na 惫颈诲丑腻苍补峁� ca na 诲峁涐梗峁璦峁�.
Now, he is in search of original text where lord Buddha has given ordinance regarding wine and women, which will help the youngsters.
For the 碍补辫腻濒颈苍, lord Buddha even surpasses Kharapa峁璦, the propagator of the science of theft, as he steals the ideas from the 惭补丑腻产丑腻谤补迟补 and also from the texts on 痴别诲腻苍迟补鈥�
苍补尘补岣� kharapa峁亂eti vaktavya峁�, yena cora艣膩stra峁� pra峁嚹玹a峁�. Athav膩 kharapa峁乨apyasminnadhik膩re Buddha ev膩dhika岣�. 办耻迟补岣�鈥�ved膩ntebhyo g峁沨墨tv膩rth膩n yo mah膩bh膩rat膩dapi / vipr膩峁嚹佱箖 mi峁Ｄ乼膩meva k峁泃av膩n ko艣asa帽caya峁� //[1]
The 碍腻辫腻濒颈办补s are also ridiculed here for their corrupt practices. For the 碍补辫腻濒颈苍, madya and maithuna are the cause for the attainment of religious enlightment. The 笔腻艣耻辫补迟补 is also a biased rogue, who plays the role of a middleman and takes the advantage of the dispute between the 碍补辫腻濒颈苍 and the Buddhist monk to take vengeance of his grievance against one of the parties.
His evil intention is expressed in the following lines鈥�
(腻迟尘补驳补迟补峁�)
测补诲补蝉尘腻产丑颈谤补苍耻峁ａ弓丑别测补峁�, gandharvai岣� tadanu峁ａ弓hita峁�. e峁 dur膩tm膩,
t膩峁� k峁urikasya 诲腻蝉墨峁� mama dayit膩峁� c墨var膩ntadar艣itay膩 /
膩kar峁ti k膩ka峁噛膩 bahu艣o g膩峁� gr膩samu峁ａ弓yeva //[2]
tadid膩n墨峁� pratihastiprots膩hanena 艣atrupak峁峁� dhva峁僺ay膩mi.
The dispute between the Buddhist monk and the 碍补辫腻濒颈苍 as is depicted in the play hints the enmity prevailing between the religious sects. Though, the satire of 惭补迟迟补惫颈濒腻蝉补 is quite bitter but not much sharp that can be designated as the best satire.
Footnotes and references:
[1]:
惭补迟迟补惫颈濒腻蝉补 12
[2]:
ibid., 14