Page:The Indian Antiquary Vol 1.pdf/278

 THE INDIAN ANTIQUARY.

244

with the other nine avatāras of Wish n u, of his incarnation also as Rāma, and of this hero's

childhood, exile, contest with Rä v an a, &c.,

(exactly as in the Rāmāyana);

and then, after

the return from Ceylon, the splendour of his reign is described (from v. 2343 onwards) in essentially

[AUGUST 2, 1872.

y a na, in the Bhārata, Hari's (praise) is every where sung, in the beginning, at the end, and in the middle ;” the attributive pun y a shows the high estimation in which the work was held at the time when this concluding section was com

the same fashion as in the episode of the sixteen

posed, though it may no doubt have been only alater addition. Eulogistic mention of Vål m i ki,

ancient kings in the Mahābhārata, Books VII.

associated with V y á sa, and therefore most pro

and XII., and consequently in similar harmony with the Rāmāyana, I. 1, and VI. 113. The

bably as the author of the Rāmāyana, occurs also in v. 5:—tal labhyate Vyāsavachah pramānam

author states that he relies for his materials

gitam cha Vālmīkimaharshină cha; and in v.

upon “ancient ballads” which treated of his

2285 :—“Thou (O Arya art: saraswati cha Bălmike(h !) smritir Dwaipāyane tathâ.” The Vaishnava complexion of the greater part of these passages from the Mahābhārata affords unmistakable evidence that they belong to a time in which the banner of the national gods had been raised in opposition to Buddhism. But whether they reach so far back as to the beginning of this period is, to say the least, doubtful; or rather we may say that there is

subject (2352 g a this cha 'py atra gāyanti ye purānavido jamál, Râme nibaddhāh...).

A very special testimony to the existence of the Rāmāy an a is borne also by the second pas

sage (8672-4), in which direct mention is made of a dramatic treatment (nàtakikritam) of the

rāmāy an am mahā kāvy am, without in deed connecting therewith the name of Vål miki, but with statements so definite as clearly to show that, so far as regards its main ele

no manner of doubt that it cannot have been the

ments, our present text of the Rāmāyana existed even at that time, and already in its

case with regard to those passages in which a fixed system of ten a v at à r as is assumed.

Vaishnava form.

Nor does the circumstance that the existence of

We are informed, namely,

that the renowned actor, to the eulogising of

a Harivansa in the sixth century seems to have

whom the passage in question is devoted," re presents in a drama “the birth of the immea

been ascertained furnish any proof that the whole of what we at present find in the poem (which extends, as is well known, to 16374 Šlokas) ac tually belonged to it at that time. We descend now from the region of the Epic which has always been regarded as sacred

surable Vishnu for the purpose of fulfilling his

wish to put to death the prince of the Rákshasas. Lomapāda (and) Dašaratha (in the drama) caused the great muni R is hy a Śri fig a to be fetched, by means of Śāntá and the courtesans. Rāma, Lakshmana and Šatrughna, Bharata Rishyašriñga and Śāntá were personated by actors characteristically dressed” (read ‘kritáh’ instead of ‘kritaih'). A third passage occurs at

(pun ya), into that of profane literature. The earliest text of this nature in which the story of Rāma is referred to in such a manner as to furnish

certain evidence the existence of a Rāmāyana is, so far as yet known,f the M rich hakatika, pur

porting to be the work of a king S a draka. that extol the sublimity of the Mahābhārata. It is true that the date of this work is also by no we read : “In the Veda, in the pure R a m fi means definitely fixed;f but so much at least is

the close (16232), where, among the verses


 * The entire narrative in the passage in question is deeply

twenty years before the Nandas (3310 Kali ; therefore 209

interesting in its bearing upon the history of dramatic art

A.D. whom Ch a na kaya wished to destroy; while in

in India. The same frenzied enthusiasm which celebrated

the same passage Vikramāditya is assigned to the year 4000 Kali, corresponding to 899 A.D. trishu warshasahasreshu Kaler yåteshu pårthiva | tris'ate cha das'anyúne hy asyām bhuvi bhavishyati || S’ſ dra ko náma virānām adhipha siddhasattamah I

actors awaken in our own day appears, from the narrative, to have been common in India also, with all its seductive allurements and effects on the female portion of the au dience, &c. + N6 help in this direction is to be got from, Pānini (se Ind. Stud. I. 147-148); but what about the Mahābhāshya I have been able to find nothing bearing on our subject in the portion of this work published by Ballantyne. f For there were several kings who bore the name S'il dra ka : cf. Rája-Tarangini, III. 345, and the no tices in Bâna, Somadeva (Ind. Streifen, I. 354)

pī,

Lassen, II. 509. In Is’varachandra Vidyāsāgara's essay on the “Marriage of Hindoo Widows,” Calc. 1856, there is a passage (p. 63) quoted from the “chapter of prophecies in the Skanda Purāma,” according to which king S' l d rak a

º

3290 years after the beginning of the

Kali (3101 B.C.; corresponding therefore with 189 A.D.)

nripán sarvān

º vardhitän

yo hanishyati ||

Charvitāyām (?) samārādhya (worshipping the divinity at Charvita,” Is’varachandra) lapsyate bhābha râpahah I tatas trishu sahasreshu

ãº.

-

bhavishyam Nandarājyam cha Châ na kyo yán ha nishyati |

Suklatirthe sarvapāpanirmuktim yo'bhilapsyate ta as trishu sahasreshu sahasrābhyadhikeshu bhavishyo Vikramādityo rājyam so 'tra pralapsyate | The same !..."; had previously been quoted in the

...]

Asiatic Researches, IX. 107, from the Kumārikakánda of the Skanda Purima; but it is remarked there that some MSS read S' tiraka instead of S’ (ld raka.