a difficult word

[adheesh sathaye]

Very interesting passage, and I would love to know more about the
context!  'vizvaamitras.r.stiprayoga' would refer, I believe, to the
alternate creation engineered by the rsi Visvamitra in his efforts to
send the king-cursed-to-be-a-Candala Trisanku into heaven in his own
body (sadeha). This narrative is best detailed in the Balakanda of the
Ramayana, Ram 1.56-1.59, though it is also found in different versions
in a slew of puranas, most interesting of which, perhaps are
DeviBhagavataP 7.10-14 and SkandaP (Nagarakhanda) 6.2-8. This
counter-creation, usually termed a prati-srsti in modern accounts, but
often just srsti in epic and puranic texts, is now blamed for
'defective' versions of the real thing - the water buffalo for the cow,
the October monsoon for the June monsoon, the donkey for the horse, and
so on.

Visvamitra (the subject of my dissertation) serves in epic and puranic
texts as an icon of varnasamkara primarily due to his having changed his
varna from ksatriya to brahman, also inhis own body. So when the passage
is referring to VM-srsti-prayoga, it is likely referring both to this
notion of intermixture (of kings becoming brahmans, perhaps?) as well as
to his counter-creation.

hope this is useful,

Adheesh Sathaye
PhD Candidate,
Dept of South and Southeast Asian Studies
University of California, Berkeley

Jonathan Silk wrote:

> In the Yazastilaka (Zivadatta 1903: ii.95-96) we find the passage:
>
> zruuyate hi: vangiima.n.dale n.rpatido.saad bhuudeve.sv
> aasavopayoga.h paarasiike.su ca svasavitriisamyoga.h simhale.su ca
> vizvaamitras.r.s.tiprayoga iti.
>
> It is said that in Bengal Brahmins consume alcoholic spirits thanks
> to the sinfulness of the king, and the Persians have sexual relations
> with their own mothers, and the Ceylonese mix castes.
>
>
> The commentary explains the last term as var.nasamkara, but while I
> am certainly willing to accept this, I do not understand why it
> should be so. Why does vizvaamitras.r.s.tiprayoga mean var.nasamkara?
>
> (Incidentally, the usually very detailed commentary omits any remarks
> at all about svasavitriisamyoga.h).
>
> thanks in advance, JAS
>
> (PS: I am aware that the entire passage is offered in criticism of
> the bad moral influence of kings, and that my translation might
> suggest that the criticism extends only to Bengal--but is there some
> reason why the word n.rpatido.saad should not come at the beginning
> of the citation, where it might more clearly apply to all three
> items?)
> --
> Jonathan Silk
> Department of Asian Languages & Cultures
> Center for Buddhist Studies
> UCLA
> 290 Royce Hall
> Box 951540
> Los Angeles, CA 90095-1540
> phone: (310)206-8235
> fax:  (310)825-8808
> silk at humnet.ucla.edu
>
>