2023-02-23 18:49:34 by ambuda-bot
This page has not been fully proofread.
THE CANDIŚATAKA OF BĀNA
46
sāmnā nā "mnāyayoner dhṛtim akṛta harer nã 'pi cakreṇa
bhedāt
310
sendrasyāirāvaṇasyā 'py upari kaluşitaḥ kevalam dānavṛṣṭyā
dānto daṇḍena mṛtyor na ca viphalayathoktābhyupāyo hato
'rir
yenopāyaḥ sa pādaḥ sukhayatu bhavataḥ pañcamaś caṇḍikāyāḥ
[Mahişa]¹ <took² no pleasure> either in the «conciliation or in
the <Sāma Veda» of (Brahmã), the Source of the Vedas,³
and because of [his fondness for] «dissension»>, <was in-
different to the discus of Hari (Viṣṇu) with its ability to
cleave»> ;
<With regard to>* Indra's [elephant] Airāvaṇa, he was simply
<angered by the shower of gifts», just as he was
<smeared> <over> by the flow of ichor» [from its fore-
head];
Nor was he subdued by the <open assault> and the <staff> of
Death (Yama), these expedients, as described, being all
ineffectual;
But he, the Foe (Mahișa), was slain by a fifth expedient-the
foot of Candika (Candi).
May that foot of Candika (Candi) prosper you!
Notes. 1. The meaning of this stanza is that the gods were unable to
subdue Mahişa by any of the four recognized means of success against an
enemy, and so employed a fifth-the foot of Candi. The four recognized
means (upayas) of subduing a foe were 'conciliation' (saman), 'sowing
dissension' (bheda), 'bribery' (dana), and 'open assault' (danda); cf.
Manu, 7. 107-109, 198. In this stanza there is a pun on each of these four
terms. In stanza 38, Mahişa is said to be 'not one in whose case the ordi-
nary expedients (abhyupayas) are effective.' 2. The word akyta appears
to be a root-aorist middle used in Vedic literature; cf. W. D. Whitney,
Roots, Verb-Forms, and Primary Derivatives of the Sanskrit Language,
s.v. 1st kr, Leipzig, 1885; but it is recognized by the grammarians as
forming a part of the s-aorist; cf. Whitney, Skt. Grammar, 881, c. 3.
Brahma is usually credited with the production of the Vedas; cf. Sürya-
śataka, stanza 99, note 2. 4. I have regarded Airavaṇasya as governed
by upari, 'in regard to'; the commentary, however, makes Airāvaṇasya
depend upon danavrştya, and it takes upari closely with kalusitaḥ, in the
46
sāmnā nā "mnāyayoner dhṛtim akṛta harer nã 'pi cakreṇa
bhedāt
310
sendrasyāirāvaṇasyā 'py upari kaluşitaḥ kevalam dānavṛṣṭyā
dānto daṇḍena mṛtyor na ca viphalayathoktābhyupāyo hato
'rir
yenopāyaḥ sa pādaḥ sukhayatu bhavataḥ pañcamaś caṇḍikāyāḥ
[Mahişa]¹ <took² no pleasure> either in the «conciliation or in
the <Sāma Veda» of (Brahmã), the Source of the Vedas,³
and because of [his fondness for] «dissension»>, <was in-
different to the discus of Hari (Viṣṇu) with its ability to
cleave»> ;
<With regard to>* Indra's [elephant] Airāvaṇa, he was simply
<angered by the shower of gifts», just as he was
<smeared> <over> by the flow of ichor» [from its fore-
head];
Nor was he subdued by the <open assault> and the <staff> of
Death (Yama), these expedients, as described, being all
ineffectual;
But he, the Foe (Mahișa), was slain by a fifth expedient-the
foot of Candika (Candi).
May that foot of Candika (Candi) prosper you!
Notes. 1. The meaning of this stanza is that the gods were unable to
subdue Mahişa by any of the four recognized means of success against an
enemy, and so employed a fifth-the foot of Candi. The four recognized
means (upayas) of subduing a foe were 'conciliation' (saman), 'sowing
dissension' (bheda), 'bribery' (dana), and 'open assault' (danda); cf.
Manu, 7. 107-109, 198. In this stanza there is a pun on each of these four
terms. In stanza 38, Mahişa is said to be 'not one in whose case the ordi-
nary expedients (abhyupayas) are effective.' 2. The word akyta appears
to be a root-aorist middle used in Vedic literature; cf. W. D. Whitney,
Roots, Verb-Forms, and Primary Derivatives of the Sanskrit Language,
s.v. 1st kr, Leipzig, 1885; but it is recognized by the grammarians as
forming a part of the s-aorist; cf. Whitney, Skt. Grammar, 881, c. 3.
Brahma is usually credited with the production of the Vedas; cf. Sürya-
śataka, stanza 99, note 2. 4. I have regarded Airavaṇasya as governed
by upari, 'in regard to'; the commentary, however, makes Airāvaṇasya
depend upon danavrştya, and it takes upari closely with kalusitaḥ, in the