^
MAY 3, 1872.]
BHAWABHUTI.
of siddha had been given in the text, thus, “the excellence of the family of Raghu is indeed perfected.” If we take exception to the rendering of another word, it is to invite discussion as to its proper representation in English, of the Sanskrit vocable tap as. This word has been rendered penance by both translators in their translation of tap o
145
without the slightest fault in her, and while she was in a condition requiring the tenderest care, is too solemn a subject for popular merriment or mimic shows. The description in the Uttara Rama Charita is equally affecting and graphic. Rá in a had scarcely returned to A y o dhya and resumed the reins of government amid the congra tulations of his relatives, ministers, and spiritual
v an a “penance-grove.' We submit that:—(1) If
guides, when R is hy a s ring a proclaimed a great
tap as be penance then t à p as a must be penitent; but this derivative has been translated “ascetic” by both of them. (2) Students are often in the habit of rendering tap as “penance ;” but should this rendering be stereotyped in scholarly versions 2 (3) The Hindu notion of tap as is simply, hard erer cises of body or mind, or of both—i.e. self-inflictions, asceticism, the very idea which the translators have given expression to in their rendering of täp as a. The root tap is doubtless the same as the root of the Greek rvºrra, and the radical meaning is also identical. Where a penitent submits to tapas
sacrifice, which took away Vasishtha and his wife from the capital of the empire. The king received from them benedictory messages and injunctions— on the one hand (A run d h a ti pressing the ad vice) to pay to his queen Si tā all the tender at tention which a virtuous wife in a delicate state
of health, could claim from a husband, and on the other hand (V as i s h tha himself laying the com
mand) to govern the kingdom consistently with popular approbation.
R im a was a good king as
well as an affectionate husband, and willingly pro mised hearty compliance with both the precepts.
(in the Roman Catholic sense) for the remission of
Meanwhile, with a view to ascertain the popular
sin, it may of course be called “penance,” but where a god or a Rishi, held to be sinless and pure, practises tapas, and mortifies himself, it cannot be called “penance' according to Hindu notions. It is then a work of supererogation—prolific of great merit and high supernatural power. The tap o v an a was never looked upon as a penitentiary; and although it might occasionally admit what might be called penances, yet it was venerated as a holy
will and the opinion of the public on his measures, he had employed a confidential emissary to bring
site—the scene of self-inflictions and mortifications
in the sense of supererogatory works by which Rishis of great repute obtained large accretions of merit and righteousness, calculated to exalt them to an equality with the gods themselves. The drama of Maha-Vira-Charita is founded on
the story of R im a concluding with his return to Ayodhya after the destruction of R i v an a and
him daily reports of the town-talk in his capital.
He was thunder-struck on learning, immediately after his receipt and acceptance of V as i s h tha's commands, that the citizens talked scandal about
Si tā, because of her capture by R & van a and compulsory stay at Lan k fi. Rāma, a little be fore this awfully scandalous report reached his ears, had answered V as is h tha's message by promis ing to guide himself according to the wishes of his subjects, to propitiate whom (ārādhanāya lo kasya) he was ready to sacrifice everything— “ affection, pity, and happiness,” yea and if fate so will, the daughter of J an a k a herself, his beloved queen.
the installation of Vibhish an a as king of Lank fi. The sequel of the story forms the subject of the
Bhavabh ( t i has represented, with all the pathos which the refined vocabulary of Sanskrit could impart, and his own extraordinary genius
Uttara Ráma Charita.
could conceive, the distractions produced in R ama's
The story of R a.m a down to the death of R i van a and the recovery of Si tā is so well known that it is unnecessary to repeat it here. Rāma's conflict with the demon-chief is recounted by the Hindus in all parts of India. It has occasioned
mind on receiving the report of his Brahman emis sary to the prejudice of his honoured and beloved queen. The indignation of posterity has affixed to the reporter of such a defamatory gossip the appel lation of “Durmukha,” or foul-mouthed. The poet, however, represents him as reluctantly and regret fully communicating the awful intelligence in the faithful discharge of a disagreeable office which he had undertaken at the king's own desire. With inexpressible mental pain, R im a decided on fol lowing what policy and worldly honour required, rather than what real justice and conjugal obliga tions demanded. Pilate-like, he abandoned one
the greatest annual festival in Bengal, the Durg fi pujá, when, for a whole fortnight, all business is suspended. Even thieves and rogues allow them selves a vacation at that period, for magistrates
and policemen get but little custom during those holidays. On the day that the Bengalis consign their
Durgā to the waters, Hindus of other provinces per form the Ram a -li là, concluding with the death of Rav an a, of which that day is the anniversary. The sequel of the story is neither so popularly known nor are all the legends of it concurrent.
The topic has always appeared to devout Hindus one of extreme delicacy. The banishment of S it ś,
whom he knew to be innocent, and stole away from a wife sleeping by his side, as guileless, as she was dutiful, and directed his brother L. a k s h m an a to conduct her to the woods.
Sit à was thus ban
ished to the forests, and left unprotected in the
