rAjahaMsa in the ha ṃsasaṃdeśa

[girish jha]

Dear Mr Fallon,
I would like to say that the word "rajahamsa"has been frequently used by Sanskrit Poets.
Four kinds of Hamsas have been mentioned in the Amarakosa(2.23-24):
1.Hamsa 2.Rajahamsa 3.Mallika 4.Dhartarastra.Rajahamsa is also synonymous with Kalahamsa.Rajahamsas tu te camcu caranair lohitah sitah.Rajahamsa is a variety of Hamsa that is white but its beak and legs are red.It is indeed of a specific type.Its vigraha-vakya is also Hamsanam raja Rajahamsah-it is compounded by rajadantadisu param(Panini 2.2.31).Mostly commentators explain it in the same way.However,one may be giving the classification of Swans in Zoological terms but Sanskrit Poets have selected it due to its fine appearance.
Regards,
GIRISH K. JHA,
SANSKRIT,PATNA UNIVERSITY,INDIA  

--- On Wed, 4/15/09, Oliver Fallon <opfallon at YAHOO.COM> wrote:

From: Oliver Fallon <opfallon at YAHOO.COM>
Subject: rAjahaMsa in the haṃsasaṃdeśa
To: INDOLOGY at liverpool.ac.uk
Date: Wednesday, April 15, 2009, 7:12 AM

I would like some help on the identity of the rā
Dear Colleagues,

I would like some help on the identity of the rājahaṃsa which is the subject
of Vedāntadeśika's Haṃsasaṃdeśa.
He tells us little of the bird except that he repeatedly stresses that it is a
pure white water bird and that it has a beautiful call as it flies to which that
of the peacock is unfavourably compared.
I was first provoked into considering that this is not a goose by a comment in
Shastriar's 1902 Madras edition of the poem, where he says:

"rājahaṃsa is a species of swan with red legs and bills (sic). Compare
'rājahaṃsās tu te cañcucaranair lohitais sītāḥ'"

The colour of the bird's beak and legs are not mentioned in the poem. Can
anyone suggest a source for 'rājahaṃsās tu te cañcucaraṇair lohitais
sītāḥ'?

There are no swans in the Indian avifauna so an editor/translator who had never
actually seen a swan could be forgiven for this misidentification.
It is unlikely to be a goose as the Indian bar-headed goose is grey with black
and white markings and has yellow beak and legs. However its call is describes
in the 10 vol.  'Handbook to the Birds of India and Pakistan' as
'Similar to the Greylag's but more nasal and musical.' The
Greylag's call is described thus: 'The far-reaching honking
aahng-ung-ung, with its variants, uttered in different keys during the morning
and evening flighting, is one of the most exhilarating bird sounds for the
sportsman and bird lover. These calls are also uttered when migrating,
especially during the night.' Interestingly, the poem describes the bird
resting during the night.
It is unlikely to be an egret as although these are pure white they have black
legs and yellow bills and as for their calls 'Except for an occasional
throaty croak when one bird is supplanting a rival, very silent.'
This leaves storks and cranes.
The white stork has red legs and bill but it's voice is 'Poorly
developed. Adults practically silent...'
The sarus crane is grey with red head and legs but grey bill.
The siberian crane is pure white with red bill and legs and it's call is
described as 'A pleasant, soft musical koonk-koonk uttered chiefly in
flight.' One problem is that the siberian crane is not now found in South
India, but that is not to say that it was not in medieval times.

Can anyone on the list suggest other identifications and also quote any
definitions of rājahaṃsa from any of the lexicons?
For reference I append a previous discussion of this word on the list below.

With thanks for your help,

Oliver Fallon
http://www.claysanskritlibrary.org/volume-v-78.html

Date:         Tue, 27 Sep 2005 13:28:36 +0100
Reply-To:     Indology <[log in to unmask]>
Sender:       Indology <[log in to unmask]>
From:         Dominik Wujastyk <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:      Re: Fw: Hamsa
Comments: To: Indology <[log in to unmask]>
Comments: cc: [log in to unmask] In-Reply-To: 
<003e01c5c351$8769eac0$5d01000a at krasnal>
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed


Julia Leslie was preparing a comprehensive re-examination of the whole 
hamsa/swan/goose/flamingo issue, but sadly her premature death last year 
prevented that work being completed.  I do remember several conversations, 
however, in which Julia noted that the various "hard" positions on
the 
fixed identity of the hamsa were always wrong.  It's not "always"
a goose, 
or swan, flamingo, or mythical bird.  In deciding how to understand what 
is meant by "hamsa", "rajahamsa" etc., in any passage,
context is very 
important, Julia thought, including chronological, geographical and 
narrative context.  Her 1998 "A Bird Bereaved" article in JIP
demonstrated 
this method admirably.  Unfortunately there isn't a simple, general answer 
about the identity of hamsa.  Interestingly, Julia felt that it was indeed 
appropriate to understand "swan" in many cases, though not all. She 
deprecated the rigid identification of "hamsa" with "goose"
which has 
become an automatic reflex in much indological writing since Vogel's 1962 
book _The goose in Indian literature and art_, which she felt was based on 
a too-narrow selection of sources (mainly architectural and mainly 
Sinhalese).  She felt that Dave's _Birds in Sanskrit Literature_ was often 
more nuanced, better informed ornithologically, and more appropriate.

DW



On Tue, 27 Sep 2005, Sven Sellmer wrote:

> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Harsha Dehejia" 
> <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Tuesday, September 27, 2005 12:49 PM
> Subject: Hamsa
>
>
>> Sven:
>> 
>> A hamsa is neither a swam or a duck but a mythic bird.
>> 
>> Regards.
>> 
>> Harsha
>> Prof. Harsha V. Dehejia
>> Ottawa, ON. Canada
>> 
>> PS Can you post this on the Indologist as I am unable to do this as I
have 
>> a new computer address.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>