1. Where Upside Down is Right Side Up A Study of Ksemendra's Narmamala and His Theory of Aucitya Gomez Kashi

Where Upside Down is Right Side Up: A Study of Ksemendra's Narmamala and His Theory of Aucitya

Gomez, Kashi

This paper examines the relationship between 11th century Sanskrit author Ksemendra's theory of literary propriety and satire in his work, the Narmamala. In what her professor describes as "an original work of scholarship in the field," Gomez's close examination of primary texts and exploration into Sanskrit literary theory led her to an appreciation of Ksemendra's work not commonly shared by others in the field. Gomez used a range of Library digital resources, including JSTOR, Oskicat, and Melvyl, as well as Berkeley's expansive collections in the South and Southeast Asian Library. Professor Knutson believes that she "has accomplished something exceedingly rare for an undergraduate, [which] would have been impossible to do this [with] a lesser institution's collection."

Where Upside Down is Right Side Up: A Study of Kṣemendra's Narmamālā and His Theory of Aucitya

Kashi Gomez

This thesis explores the relationship between the 11th century Sanskrit author Kṣemendra's theory of literary propriety and his satire the Narmamālā. I examine the way propriety operates on a rhetorical and social level in the Narmamālā and how the implicit application of the concept in the Narmamālā is used to produce both humor and social value judgment. I demonstrate that Kṣemendra's concept of propriety serves as a regulator for the intended sentiment of a work. In satire, however, this sentiment must be destroyed by means of impropriety in order to convey humor. I propose that humor is produced by incongruity between what appears on the surface and what lays beneath, hence the title "Where Upside Down is Right Side Up." Through my research I found that the application of Kṣemendra's conception of propriety is not only evident in his satires, but that his satires and his literary theory actually utilize the same function of negation to engender social critique, which emerges as a dominant literary theme in 11th and 12th century Kashmir.

I am especially indebted to my advisor Jesse Knutson for his invaluable suggestions along the way, his overflowing enthusiasm about everything, his unwavering belief in my abilities and for introducing me to kāvya. A special thanks to Katarzyna Pazucha for recommending Kṣemendra as a topic of study, Sonam Kachru for pointing me towards some foundational sources, Kira Charlesworth for her thoughtful suggestions and the department of South and Southeast Asian Studies at UC Berkeley.

Where Upside Down is Right Side Up: A Study of Kṣemendra's Narmamālā and His Theory of Aucitya

Kashi Gomez

Introduction The 11th century Kashmiri satirist and literary theorist Kṣemendra is often referenced by scholars of South Asia, but never comprehensively attended to. Historians mine his social satires for insight into medieval Kashmiri society; scholars of Sanskrit literature cannot discuss the progress of Sanskrit literary theory without mentioning the author's theory of propriety, aucitya. The term polymath is frequently applied to Kṣemendra as he is the author of a daunting and varied corpus. Yet this flattering title might conceal as much as it reveals, indicating a need to schematically arrange his works into separate and isolated categories that are immune to mutual dialogue, interaction, and removed from their socio-historical context. In what follows, I will argue that Kṣemendra's works do not belong singularly to one specific field of study, or necessarily to mutually isolated ones; rather they are in dialogue with each other and their world. More specifically, I seek to illuminate the relationship between Kṣemendra's satire, the Narmamālā, and his theory of aucitya as presented in his treatise the Aucityavicāracarcā. I will examine the way aucitya operates on a rhetorical and social level in the Narmamālā and how the implicit application of the concept in the Narmamālā is used to produce both humor and social value judgment. I propose that the application of the author's unique take on the concept of propriety is not only evident in his satires, but that his satires and his literary theory actually utilize the same function of negation and incongruity to engender social critique.

Where Upside Down is Right Side Up: A Study of Ksemendra's Narmamala and His Theory of Aucitya

Kashi Gomez

Before delving into an investigation of the relationship between aucitya and the Narmamālā it would be beneficial to think about Kṣemendra as a historical figure, briefly outline his theory of aucitya and recapitulate the subject matter of one of his most provocative and perplexing literary works, the Narmamālā.

Kṣemendra: A Man of Propriety

Kṣemendra composed most of his works during the reign of King Ananta of Kashmir (1028-1063 CE).1 Like other Sanskrit authors, he reveals few personal details, but he claimed that his father was a wealthy Śaiva and we know he studied rhetoric under Abhinavagupta, a philosopher of the Kaula Śaiva tradition.2 This is especially intriguing considering Kṣemendra's critique of Tantric practitioners in the Narmamālā. He also studied under the Vaiṣṇava teacher Somapāda and some scholars suggest that Ksemendra may have eventually converted to Vaiṣṇavism.3 Kṣemendra's fraught relationship with religion, however, is a matter I will discuss in a later section.

Sūryakānta argues that Kṣemendra's later work, the Daśāvatāracarita, extols Viṣṇu, while the Narmamālā and Deśopadeśa ridicule Śaivism. However, as Baldissera points out, Kṣemendra does not ridicule the principles of Śavism, but its hypocritical practitioners. I think a thorough investigation of Kṣemendra's works indicates that his concern is not so much religion itself but the social implications of religious affiliations.4

This distinction is important in order to preclude a simplistic reading of the Narmamālā as a singularly didactic work warning against moral degradation caused by Śaivite institutions.

1 (Sūryakānta 1954, 6-7) The Daśāvatāracarita (1066 CE ) is the only known work by Kṣemendra written during the reign of King Ananta's succescor King Kalaśa. 2 (Sūryakānta 1954, 10-11) 3 (Sūryakānta 1954, 15) 4 (Baldissera 2005, XXXIII)

Aucitya: What is Proper

Kashi Gomez

In his work the Aucityavicāracarcā, Kṣemendra outlines his theory of aucitya, propriety, as the "life-force" of poetry.5 He stresses the fundamental necessity for propriety in poetry, saying, "Aucitya, whose definition will be given further on, is the permanent, eternal life-force of poetry, without which it is lifeless even though filled with guṇas and alaṅkāras."6 Kṣemendra gives precedence to the presence of aucitya over all other aspects of kāvya, which is a significant departure from previous alaṅkāraśastra discourse. Although aucitya comes into a certain level of prominence in Ānandavardhana's Dhvanyāloka, it is only discussed in its capacity to support rasa. Kṣemendra, however, asserts that propriety must permeate every aspect of a composition, from the overarching categories of rasa, plot, and character development all the way down to mundane rhetorical aspects such as gender, number, particles, prefixes, and individual phonemes. His treatise on poetics maps out how aucitya can be identified through examples of aucitya or anaucitya in verses from his own corpus and from the works of other poets. The examples given in his treatise also demonstrate the circumstantial nature of determining whether or not aucitya is present.

Although Kṣemendra is not a liminal figure in the world of Sanskrit literature, he is scantly studied; earlier scholars have dismissed his satires such as the Narmamālā as distasteful and sometimes even "improper" due to their vulgarity and at times, obscenity. In reference to the Narmamālā and its counterpart, the Deśopadeśa, Sūryakānta says of Kṣemendra, "He descends to low vulgarity in these works. One can hardly appreciate the minute details in which he indulges and everything points to the

5 (Sūryakānta 1954, 118-119) Sūryakānta translates jīvitam sometimes as both "life" and "soul." I wil take it as "life-force" (as suggested by Pollock's "The Social Aesthetic and Sanskrit Literary Theory) to try and bring out both meanings. 6 (Kṣemendra 1961, 19) aucityam tvagre vaksyamānalakṣaṇam sthiram avināśvaraṃ jīvitam kāvysya, tena vinā 'sya guṇālaṅkārayuktasya 'pi nirjīvatvāt |

Where Upside Down is Right Side Up: A Study of Kṣemendra's Narmamālā and His Theory of Aucitya

Kashi Gomez

Where Upside Down is Right Side Up: A Study of Ksemendra's Narmamala and His Theory of Aucitya

Kashi Gomez

Śaiva guru is invited to perform a sacrifice. In the third parihāsa the sacrifice begins and evolves into an alcohol-induced orgy of sorts. In the midst of this comes the news that the Kāyastha's superiors have been arrested. The Kāyastha prepares to flee but he is caught and imprisoned. After his imprisonment he is bailed out by his prostitute sister. The protagonist is reduced to a pathetic state and suffocates to death after falling face down in a pile of shit. In addition to the main narrative the text is interspersed with descriptions of various other degenerate characters such as other corrupt government officials, phony gurus and their lowly disciples, a quack doctor and astrologer, as well as a widow and some impotent old-men.

When thinking about treatises on literary theory we must pose this question: to what extent did poets actually adhere to the codes laid out in these theoretical texts? In the Aucityavicāracarcā, Kṣemendra seems to completely ignore some of the most pertinent questions regarding propriety in his own satirical works. While he elaborates on aucitya in the hāsya rasa and discusses vulgarity in kāvya, he never directly addresses the genre of satire or the function of vulgarity in satire. Even so there are several ways we can consider the extent to which Kṣemendra utilized aucitya in his satires. A timeline, indicating the order in which Kṣemendra's works were written, can serve as one tool for such an investigation. A very small number of Kṣemendra's works are dated but his three treatises on poetics, the Suvṛttatilaka, the Aucityavicāracarcā and the Kavikaṇṭhābharaṇa quote his literary works, providing us with an idea of when certain groups of works were produced in relation to the others. Unlike many of Kṣemendra's other works, the Narmamālā is not quoted in any of his treatises. However, due to the many similarities between the Narmamālā and his satire the Deśopadeśa, which is quoted in the Kavikaṇṭhābharaṇa, scholars frequently associate the two texts with the same time

Kashi Gomez

Where Upside Down is Right Side Up: A Study of Ksemendra's Narmamala and His Theory of Aucitya

Kashi Gomez

Kashi Gomez

Where Upside Down is Right Side Up: A Study of Kṣemendra's Narmamālā and His Theory of Aucitya

Kashi Gomez

Kashi Gomez

Where Upside Down is Right Side Up: A Study of Ksemendra's Narmamala and His Theory of Aucitya

Kashi Gomez

Kashi Gomez

Where Upside Down is Right Side Up: A Study of Ksemendra's Narmamala and His Theory of Aucitya

Kashi Gomez

serve very specific purposes in demonstrating an overt and self-conscious application of aucitya.

Aucitya and Rasa

While Kṣemendra expands on the concept of aucitya outside the confines of its relationship to rasa, the connection between rasa and aucitya is still a critical point of discussion in the Aucityavicāracarcā. This problematic discussion began in the Dhvanyāloka of Ānandavardhana, written by Kṣemendra's predecessor of two centuries.

It is thus worthwhile to draw attention to what sets apart Kṣemendra's understanding of aucitya from Ānandavardhana's. This will serve not only to credit Kṣemendra with an original system of thought, which departs from the dominant school of rasa theory, but also to aid us in developing an interpretation of the Narmamālā based intimately on Kṣemendra's understanding of aucitya, as the fundamental goal of a composition. This will in turn allow us to make important connections between the literary and the social.

In the Dhvanyāloka, Ānandavardhana enumerates various ways in which a work can convey rasa such as: appropriateness of vibhāvas, sthāyibhāvas, anubhāvas and sañcāribhāvas, appropriateness of plot whether traditional or invented—intensifying and lessening rasa according to appropriate circumstances—appropriateness of characters and their actions or speech according to their class, as well as appropriateness of 'texture'.31 While propriety warrants an ample amount of consideration, in the Locana, Abhinavagupta explains:

By the word Appropriate he hints at the fact that rasadhvani is the real life of a poem because he shows that propriety is always with respect to the rasa. For if the rasa is absent, with respect to what could one use this word "propriety" that has become so popular?32

31 (Ingalls, Masson and Patwardhan 1990, 427-433)

32 (Ingalls, Masson and Patwardhan 1990, 71 1.2)

14

Where Upside Down is Right Side Up: A Study of Ksemendra's Narmamala and His Theory of Aucitya

Kashi Gomez

The subordination of propriety to rasa is the distinguishing factor in Ānandavardhana's conception of aucitya. In contrast, Kṣemendra maintains that aucitya is the true aim of poetry and rasa is an ornament, "Essence of poetry [rasa], sustained and ornamented through flavors, like the erotic and others, is firmly established, like (the life of a man) sustained and made firm by a preparation of quick-silver."33 In the Aucityavicāracarcā, Kṣemendra elaborates on propriety in each of the rasas, but it is the Hāsya and Bībhatsa rasa, which are especially relevant to understanding the Narmamālā. In his explication of Hāsya rasa, Kṣemendra demonstrates that humor is supported by a subservient Śṛṅgāra rasa. He cites two examples of propriety in Hāsya rasa aided by Śṛṅgāra rasa and one example of impropriety in the Hāsya rasa. The verse exemplifying anaucitya is by Śyāmala: While kissing her, he, with the coughing sound of 'khāḍ' spat out her tooth, which had been loosened from its roots and had reached his very throat.34 Kṣemendra argues that in this case humor is overshadowowed by the sentiment of disgust and therefore shows impropriety.35 The sentiment of this verse, however, does not seem so different from some of the verses in the Narmamālā. There is a particularly humorous verse in the third parihāsa of the Narmamālā, which ridicules a wealthy old merchant who desires to copulate with his young wife: Eager to make love even though his penis looks like squashed entrails that old man places his hand on her pussy, and guards it like a treasure36

Where Upside Down is Right Side Up: A Study of Ksemendra's Narmamala and His Theory of Aucitya

Kashi Gomez

Both of the verses are intended to Hāsya rasa with subservient Śṛṅgāra and Bībhatsa rasas, so what makes the former an example of anaucitya? It seems that here, perhaps, the distinguishing factor is the overall intention of the composition, the first being comedy and the second being satire. Aucitya is always circumstantial. Satire is certainly humorous but it is not the typical comic relief found in Sanskrit plays and kāvya. The classic representation of Hāsya rasa seems to be a lighter mode of humor, which is often employed as a subsidiary rasa in conjunction with Śṛṅgāra.

The mixing of rasas is a delicate matter to which both Kṣemendra and Ānandavardhana devote their attention. Ānandavardhana urges, "Even when a figure is intended to be subordinate [or helpful to the rasa] it must be taken up at the proper time and not at the wrong time..."37 A subordinate rasa, which obscures the primary rasa, results in impropriety. For his part, Kṣemendra's insists, "One should preserve propriety, the very life (of poetry), when putting these [rasas] together as constituents and the constituted. Touched with (even a particle of) the dirt of impropriety the mixture of sentiments is not liked by anyone."38 According to Kṣemendra, Śyāmala's verse, cited previously, shows impropriety due to unsuitable dominance of Bībhatsa rasa over Hāsya rasa. I would suggest that the dominant sentiment of disgust in the verse from the Narmamālā, which is just one among many similar verses, is appropriate to the overall goal of the work. The verse is humorous in that it ridicules the impotent merchant but at the same time the sentiment of disgust, felt by the audience upon reading it, produces a semblance of Śānta rasa, which is appropriate to satire.39 In the

37 (Ingalls, Masson and Patwardhan 1990, 278 2.18-2.19b) 38 (Sūryakānta 1954, 137) 39 (Leavitt 2011, 280) Leavitt theorizes, "Satire, for example—in which the false appearance of the rasa of tranquility in particular is generated by hypocritical spiritual aspirants and the like—instruct the audience to renounce impropriety in all four life aims." He supports this statement with a citation from the Abhinavabhāratī of the Nāṭyaśāstra, "prahasanarūpakenāucityāgah sarvapuruṣārtheṣu vyutpādayati" (6.40; 1992:290.9-10).

Where Upside Down is Right Side Up: A Study of Ksemendra's Narmamala and His Theory of Aucitya

Kashi Gomez

Aucityavicāracarcā, Kṣemendra gives careful consideration to the application of Bībhatsa as a subsidiary rasa. He cites an example from his own work the Bauddhavadānakalpalatā, which mixes the repulsive and the erotic. The verse is a pun, which allows the two incongruent rasas to appear side by side. On the dominant side of the pun there is the jackal, which is tearing apart a corpse and on the reverse side of the pun there is the woman engaged in lovemaking. Kṣemendra comments, "The speaker being a Bodhisattva with his mind full of strong (feeling) for renunciation, the mockery of the enjoyment of woman's love, through abominable disgust, carries a charming propriety with it."40 He goes on to explain that the rasa of the work as a whole is Śānta rasa, but the sentiment of disgust mixed with the erotic aids in the production of this overarching rasa.41

Vulgar imagery plays a very prominent role in the Narmamālā since its cast of characters consists of degraded members of society. In the first parihāsa, Kṣemendra describes the intoxicated Kāyastha saying:

He was enthralled by the music of the loud phadat sound produced by his thick bark ledgers, while both his testicles leaped around as they protruded from the gaps in his loincloth The drunken divira danced naked breaking his seat and his jar, his body spattered by [black] dollops from his rolling, full inkpot42

Aucitya is a very circumstantial category and our understanding of what is appropriate and what is not must be adjusted according to the broader scope of a composition.

These disgusting tendencies of the Kāyastha are appropriate to the overall thrust of the

40 (Sūryakānta 1954, 138) 41 (Sūryakānta 1954, 139) 42 (Baldissera 2005, 68-69 1.37-38)

Kashi Gomez

Where Upside Down is Right Side Up: A Study of Ksemendra's Narmamala and His Theory of Aucitya

Kashi Gomez

explains that propriety has been shown in correctly describing the stages of childhood and young adulthood. Now we must ask, how do we know what characterizes the various stages of life for a female or male, or what the proper behavior is for a king, a lowly servant or an ascetic? The Dhvanyāloka explains that characters should behave in a manner appropriate to their social status whether they be high class or low class, god or human. It is explained that a king, for example, who is a mere human should not be described as leaping across the sea because this is a godly activity. If a king is part human and part divine however, then there would be no contradiction and this feat would be appropriate. Propriety is grounded in social morals and norms, which are established by the society. While these treatises on poetics provide a few key examples, overall, such social issues are not elaborated upon by the tradition of Sanskrit theorists; instead it is assumed that the reader is already attuned to the social. The problem of “the social” in Sanskrit literature is a matter, which Pollock discusses at great length with regard to dhvani. Ānandavardhana's analysis of vastudhvani focuses on how dhvani functions on the level of language rather than the underlying “socio-literary conventions.” Pollock unravels the issue of the social through a series of examples. The first of those being the first example that Ānandavardhana himself gives: You're free to go wandering, holy man. The little dog was killed today by the fierce lion making its lair in the thicket on the banks of the Godā river. This verse is an implied prohibition disguised as an invitation. Abhinavagupta explains that the verse is spoken by a woman who desires to prevent the mendicant from finding

Kashi Gomez

Kashi Gomez

Where Upside Down is Right Side Up: A Study of Ksemendra's Narmamala and His Theory of Aucitya

Kashi Gomez

If we are to understand rasābhāsa as the literary transgression of social norms, then we can also accept rasābhāsa as a major component of satire, as well as of the Narmamālā in particular. The incongruity between the social status of characters in the Narmamālā and their inappropriate behavior is central to the creation of humor.

Where Upside Down is Right Side Up: A Study of Ksemendra's Narmamala and His Theory of Aucitya

Kashi Gomez

produce "a comic account of the activities of Kāyasthas of the past."58 The patron did not request a didactic composition to warn listeners against partaking in vice. The last verse of the Narmamālā also reinforces the way in which social critique and humor mutually reinforce each other in satire: This Narmamālā has been composed as an investigation of the misbehavior in the evil actions of hordes of diviras and niyogins For the sake of laughter full of amusement for good people, it is told as a teaching for everyone that obtains its own reward.59 The aesthetic of humor in the Narmamālā raises some interesting connections to aucitya and perhaps broadens its scope. Kṣemendra does not directly address the genre of satire in the Aucityavicāracarcā but an investigation into the history of Hāsya rasa will enable us to develop an understanding of how the principles of propriety are effective in producing satire. In the Rasādhyāya of the Nāṭyaśāstra Bharata elaborates on the comic sentiment saying, It arises from such vibhāvas as wearing clothes and ornaments that belong to someone else or do not fit (vikṛta), shamelessness (dhrārṣṭya), greed (laulya), tickling sensitive parts of the body (kuhaka), telling fantastic tales (asaṭpralāpa), seeing some (comic) deformity (vyaṅga), and describing faults (doṣodāhanana).60 The first vibhāva, vikṛta represents one of the most crucial aspects of humor in the Narmamālā. The behavior of a character and his social status are often incompatible. The Kāyastha makes grand displays of piety but simultaneously blunders temples; his wife pretends to be sick to avoid her husband but sleeps around with all the young men in town. Both the Kāyastha and his wife assume a pompous style of dress to flaunt their newly obtained wealth and power, but it is quite evident that they have adopted habits

Where Upside Down is Right Side Up: A Study of Ksemendra's Narmamala and His Theory of Aucitya

Kashi Gomez

which are unsuitable to their past social status as paupers. Kṣemendra describes the Kāyastha as follows:

...His feet were caked with filth and he sported a cap raised on one side through a subtle arrangement of its folds

... With a golden ring spiraling three times around his finger— he was panting and his face was grimacing from the exhaustion of a long voyage.61

The careful arrangement of the folds in his hat indicates a vanity of appearance, and the gold ring shows off his wealth, but his inherent low-caste is evident in his filthy feet, which would be unsuitable for someone who was highborn. This same incongruity is apparent in regards to the Kāyastha's wife:

The elegant highborn daughters of her neighbors, looking below at the beautiful wife of the Kāyastha in her palace said, "She once drank rice-water obtained by begging, in a stone cup pieced together from shards, now she only drinks musk-wine in a silver cup."62

There is a subtle irony in this verse. The high-born daughters are "admiring" the Kāyastha's wife in her palace but since they are looking down at her from above, it must be assumed that her palace is in fact much more modest than the tall homes of her neighbors. Her demeanor, however, suggests that she believes herself to be living in the grandest possible palace.63

In his article on deformity and humor, Gitomer points out that the word vikṛta is commonly used to mean, "deformed, disfigured, mutilated." He proposes that in addition to the way that Bharata defines the term, we should understand vikṛta to

61 (Baldissera 2005, 50-51 1.47-49)

62 (Baldissera 2005, 14 1.147-8) This is my own translation from Baldissera's critical edition of the Sanskrit text. Baldissera seems to miss the irony in the verse.

63 (Baldissera 2005, 13) In verse 1.43 the Kāyastha's wife gazes out her window and imagines herself to be the queen waiting for her husband the king to return on the royal highway.

24

Kashi Gomez

Where Upside Down is Right Side Up: A Study of Ksemendra's Narmamala and His Theory of Aucitya

Kashi Gomez

Where Upside Down is Right Side Up: A Study of Ksemendra's Narmamala and His Theory of Aucitya

Kashi Gomez

Kashi Gomez

Kashi Gomez

Where Upside Down is Right Side Up: A Study of Ksemendra's Narmamala and His Theory of Aucitya

Kashi Gomez

Kashi Gomez

undoubtedly a decline and this decline is directly related to what was happening in the socio-political world. The resurgence of Sanskrit literary culture under the rule of Zain-ul-‘ābidīn is attributed to the establishment of political stability after many tumultuous decades and to the reinstatement of royal patronage for Sanskrit poets. The deterioration of Sanskrit learning is credited to the political turmoil in Kashmir marked by a sequence of degenerate rulers spanning the 9th through the 12th centuries. The candid descriptions of social degradation and royal misconduct, unique to 11th and 12th century Kashmir, demarcate the period before the decline of Sanskrit literary works. Critiques of society are, in a sense, criticisms of the sovereign, who is responsible for upholding righteousness. Pollock suggests that the instability of rulership in Kashmir also meant that the “courtly ethos”, essential to sustaining Sanskrit learning was therefore also unstable. It is possible these attacks on the sovereign were induced by anxiety about the unreliability of royal patronage. Both Kṣemendra and Kalhaṇa inform us that during these years kings, who should be patrons of temples, plundered them for wealth instead. While the instability of the royal court may have been responsible for the decline of Sanskrit in Kashmir, this also meant that authors were not compelled to depict the realm favorably. Consequentially a new spirit of negativity emerged in Sanskrit literature. One poet who adopted this style, Maṇkha, addressed an assembly of poets saying, “All other poets have debased their language that priceless treasure, by shamelessly putting it up for sale in those cheap shops—royal courts.” The room for criticism is also a result of the broken lines of succession in Kashmir. Pollock notes that most kings did not govern Kashmir for more than a couple of decades and power was

Where Upside Down is Right Side Up: A Study of Kṣemendra's Narmamālā and His Theory of Aucitya

Kashi Gomez

Kashi Gomez

Where Upside Down is Right Side Up: A Study of Kṣemendra's Narmamālā and His Theory of Aucitya

Kashi Gomez

It seems likely that the Kāyastha of the Narmamālā is modeled on Bhadreśvara especially since he was a prominent figure who would have been known to Kṣemendra's patron but Bhadreśvara was not the only Kāyastha with a tarnished reputation.

The Social Unraveling

Kāyasthas in general are a favorite subject of ridicule for both Kṣemendra and Kalhaṇa. In Kashmir, the term Kāyastha does not refer to a particular caste but to a particular profession. Kāyasthas were clerks skilled in writing documents, record keeping and accounting.98 In early medieval Kashmir, rulers became cripplingly reliant on Kāyasthas. Kalhaṇa laments,

The whales of the ocean and kings are similar. The former consider it a donation when the cloud offers back droplets of their own water, which it had taken away. And alas, the latter considers the hordes of corrupt clerks [Kāyastha] to be working for their benefit when they openly loot everything and return traces of it.99

Looting and returning traces of wealth as if it were a favor, is also a matter addressed in the Narmamālā100 but the point is that due to the favor enjoyed by Kāyasthas among royalty, their power remained unchecked and they came to be seen as oppressors of the people.101 On a certain level, literary attacks on the royal intermediaries are a way to hold rulers responsible for social degradation without committing too much offence to the royals themselves. Kalhaṇa points out, "If the king himself abducts wives of the subjects, who else will there be to punish the transgression of propriety?"102 Kalhaṇa is sometimes more direct with his political criticisms, but Kṣemendra's jabs, laced with

97 (Baldissera 2005, 58) 98 (Yadava 1973, 53–54) 99 (Knutson Unpublished, 48 4.630) 100 (Baldissera 2005, 59–60 1.92–94) "For example, I once took [from the temple] a huge copper vessel and then using a hundredth part of it, with great devotion, I presented a bell to the temple…." 101 (Yadava 1973, 54) 102 (Knutson, Fourth Current Unpublished, 3 4.29)

Kashi Gomez

Kashi Gomez

Where Upside Down is Right Side Up: A Study of Ksemendra's Narmamala and His Theory of Aucitya

Kashi Gomez

Where Upside Down is Right Side Up: A Study of Ksemendra's Narmamala and His Theory of Aucitya

Kashi Gomez

Where Upside Down is Right Side Up: A Study of Ksemendra's Narmamala and His Theory of Aucitya

Kashi Gomez

Where Upside Down is Right Side Up: A Study of Ksemendra's Narmamala and His Theory of Aucitya

Kashi Gomez

Where Upside Down is Right Side Up: A Study of Ksemendra's Narmamala and His Theory of Aucitya

Kashi Gomez

Where Upside Down is Right Side Up: A Study of Ksemendra's Narmamala and His Theory of Aucitya

Kashi Gomez

Where Upside Down is Right Side Up: A Study of Ksemendra's Narmamala and His Theory of Aucitya

Kashi Gomez

Where Upside Down is Right Side Up: A Study of Ksemendra's Narmamala and His Theory of Aucitya

Kashi Gomez

Where Upside Down is Right Side Up: A Study of Ksemendra's Narmamala and His Theory of Aucitya

Kashi Gomez

Where Upside Down is Right Side Up: A Study of Ksemendra's Narmamala and His Theory of Aucitya

Kashi Gomez

Where Upside Down is Right Side Up: A Study of Ksemendra's Narmamala and His Theory of Aucitya

Kashi Gomez

Where Upside Down is Right Side Up: A Study of Ksemendra's Narmamala and His Theory of Aucitya

Kashi Gomez

Where Upside Down is Right Side Up: A Study of Ksemendra's Narmamala and His Theory of Aucitya

Kashi Gomez

Where Upside Down is Right Side Up: A Study of Ksemendra's Narmamala and His Theory of Aucitya

Kashi Gomez

Where Upside Down is Right Side Up: A Study of Ksemendra's Narmamala and His Theory of Aucitya

Kashi Gomez

Where Upside Down is Right Side Up: A Study of Ksemendra's Narmamala and His Theory of Aucitya

Kashi Gomez

Where Upside Down is Right Side Up: A Study of Ksemendra's Narmamala and His Theory of Aucitya

Kashi Gomez

Where Upside Down is Right Side Up: A Study of Ksemendra's Narmamala and His Theory of Aucitya

Kashi Gomez

Where Upside Down is Right Side Up: A Study of Ksemendra's Narmamala and His Theory of Aucitya

Kashi Gomez

Where Upside Down is Right Side Up: A Study of Ksemendra's Narmamala and His Theory of Aucitya

Kashi Gomez

Where Upside Down is Right Side Up: A Study of Ksemendra's Narmamala and His Theory of Aucitya

Kashi Gomez

Where Upside Down is Right Side Up: A Study of Ksemendra's Narmamala and His Theory of Aucitya

Kashi Gomez

Where Upside Down is Right Side Up: A Study of Ksemendra's Narmamala and His Theory of Aucitya

Kashi Gomez

Where Upside Down is Right Side Up: A Study of Ksemendra's Narmamala and His Theory of Aucitya

Kashi Gomez

Where Upside Down is Right Side Up: A Study of Ksemendra's Narmamala and His Theory of Aucitya

Kashi Gomez

Where Upside Down is Right Side Up: A Study of Ksemendra's Narmamala and His Theory of Aucitya

Kashi Gomez

Where Upside Down is Right Side Up: A Study of Ksemendra's Narmamala and His Theory of Aucitya

Kashi Gomez

Where Upside Down is Right Side Up: A Study of Ksemendra's Narmamala and His Theory of Aucitya

Kashi Gomez

Where Upside Down is Right Side Up: A Study of Ksemendra's Narmamala and His Theory of Aucitya

Kashi Gomez

Where Upside Down is Right Side Up: A Study of Ksemendra's Narmamala and His Theory of Aucitya

Kashi Gomez

Humor does not always transpose well from one culture to another, especially when the cultures are almost a thousand years removed, but you can contextualize it by evaluating the degree of social incongruity. In the United States, Hollywood is immensely influential. When British comedian Ricky Gervais hosted the Golden Globes, his jokes about this elite, powerful group suggest that these idols are actually products of a corrupt system: It was a big year for 3D movies, Toy Story, Despicable Me, Tron. Seems like everything this year was 3-dimensional. Except the characters in The Tourist...But no, it must be good cause it’s nominated so shut up, okay. And I’d like to crush this ridiculous rumor going around that the only reason The Tourist was nominated was so that the Hollywood foreign press could hang out with Johnny Depp and Angelina Jolie. That is, that is rubbish. That is not the only reason, they also accepted bribes. No, all that happened was some of them were taken to see Cher in concert. How the hell is that a bribe? Really? Do you want to go see Cher? No. Why not? Cause its not 1975!111

This satirical remark by Gervais is packed full of laughs. First we are invited to laugh at the high-powered stars who have attended the Golden Globes to celebrate their own achievements, which—as suggested by Gervais—are rigged by the academy and are unrelated to their actual accomplishments. On another level, this comment critiques the corruption of the Hollywood Foreign Press Association, which as an organization, should be objective. While Gervais jokes that the association was accepting bribes, it might not be too far off to speculate that they were favoring “friends.” The last line, however, trumps all the other jokes. Not only is the Hollywood Foreign Press Association—an organization of journalists and movie critics—incompetent at distinguishing between simple and complex characters but they also don’t know the difference between a good bribe and bad bribe. In this sense, the Hollywood Foreign Press Association, as described by comedian Gervais, is no different from the court magistrate in the Narmamālā who could not discriminate between good shit and bad shit.111 (Gervais 2012)

Bibliography

Kashi Gomez

Kashi Gomez

Kaul, Madhusudan Shastri. Preface and Introduction. Vol. 40, in The Deśopadeśa and Narmamālā of Kṣemendra, 1-26. Poona: The "Āryabhuṣan" Press, 1923.

Knutson, Jesse Ross. 2011. "Courtly Crepuscule: The End of the Early Medieval in Sanskrit Verse." The 2011 Junior/Senior Sanskrit Symposium. Vancouver, 1-28.

Leavitt, Guy. "The Social in Kashmiri Aesthetics: Suggesting and Speciously Savoring Rasa in Ānandavardhana and Abhinavagupta." In South Asian Texts in History : Critical Engagements with Sheldon Pollock, edited by Yigal and Cox, Whitney and McCrea, Lawrence Bronner, 267-292. Ann Arbor, MI: Association for Asian Studies, 2011.

McCrea, Lawrence J. Harvard Oriental Series Vol. 71: The Teleology of Poetics in Medieval Kashmir. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2008.

Mohan, Krishna. Early Medieval History of Kashmir: With Special Reference to The Loharas A.D. 1003-1171. New Delhi: Meharchand Lachhmandas Publications, 1981.

Pollock, Sheldon. "The Death of Sanskrit." Comparative Studies in Society and History 43, no. 2 (July 2001): 392-426. Accessed 13 April 2012. http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?fromPage=online&aid=80241.

Pollock, Sheldon. "The Social Aesthetic and Sanskrit Literary Theory." Journal of Indian Philosophy (2001) Vol. 29, No.1: 197-229. Accessed January 27, 2011 Doi:10.1023/A:101565123467.

Siegel, Lee. Laughing Matters: Comic Tradition in India. Chigago: University of Chicago Press, 1987.

Sūryakānta. Kṣemendra Studies: Together with English Translation of His Kavikaṇṭhābharana, Aucityavicāracarā and Suvṛttatilaka. Vol. 91. Poona: Oriental Book Agency, 1954.

Yadava, BNS. Society and Culture in Northern India in the Twelfth Century. Allahabad: Central Book Depot, 1973.

Reference Materials

Apte, Vaman Shivaram. Revised and enlarged edition of Prin. V. S. Apte's The Practical Sanskrit-English Dictionary. Poona: Prasad Prakashan, 1959. Accessed April 16, 2012. http://dsal.uchicago.edu/dictionaries/apte/

Monier-Williams. A Sanskrit-English dictionary : etymological and philologically arranged with special reference to cognate Indo-European languages. New Delhi: Asian Educational Services, 1999.

40