Kahakosu

SR No.: 001367
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: Shreechandmuni
Publisher: Prakrit Text Society Ahmedabad
Publication Year: 1969
Total Pages: 675
Language: Apbhramsa, Prakrit, Hindi, Sanskrit
Classification: Book_Devnagari & Story
File Size: 10 MB

Page 13

6
ing 10 Samdhis they are not quoted. This will be clear from the Table given by Dr. H. L. JAIN in his Hindi Introduction.
Sricandra tells us, at the beginning of his work, that the Kathakośa was composed by many giíted saint-poets in the past. Then in one of the verses in his Prasasti (No. 19) he tells us that at the request of the pious (bhavyan he studied (lit. understood) a work of an earlier Acārya, and then composed neately (samyak) this fine Kathakośa. This clearly indicates that he had a specific Kathakośa of an earlier Ācārya before him. This is no other than the Kathakośa (which later on came to be labelled as (Bịhat-Kathakośa) of Harişeņa who is called an acārya in the concluding colophon. Further, Sricandra's veiled protest against some predecessor/s of his who gave the tales without specifying the Gathās of the Mūlaradhanā suits very well in the case of Harişeņa and )
ery well in the case of Harişeņa and his Kathākośa, 17 Lastly, Harişeņa composed his Kathākośa in Saka 853/ Samvat 989, i.e., A.D. 931.-2, that is, nearly 140 years before Suicanda wrote his Kk. A comparative study of both those Kathakośas shows that Sticandra is writing with Harişeņa's work before him. There is a remarkable agreement in the sequence of stories adopted by both of them. 18 Whenever the stories are common-and their number is pretty large--the basic contents are identical in both, even with common words and expressions. Harişeņa is more exhaustive in giving details about pre-births and afterbriths and sub-stories. Almost in every case Sricandra's tales look like summaries of those given by Harişeņa. Áricandara omits, at times silently and at times with specific remarks, some of the stories found, according to the corresponding sequence in the Katbākośa of Harişeņa. Sricandra's Kk does not show stories Nos. 73, 79, 83--4, 102--9, 123, 125 and 149 of Harisena. 19 With regard to No. 73, Sricandra plainly says that Yasodhara's tale is too well-known to be given (atrarthe Yasodhar ākhyānam kathyate, suprasiddhatvāt na likhitam'); and with regard to Nos. 83--4, he says that the stories of Bhārata and Rāmāyana are endless. Thus these stories were present in his source, otherwise such remarks become meaningless. These tales are actually present in the Kathakośa of Harişena.
There are a few other cosiderations wbich indicate that Śricandra might have used, in addition to the Kk of Harişeņa, some more sources including perhaps some commentaries on the Bhagavali Arādhana. From the Kk.s of Prabhācandra and Nemidatta, it appears that some tales were connected with Gātha No. 2 of the Bha, -Aradhana, but that Gātkā is passed over by Harişeņa. Sricaudra, however, illustrates uddyotana (both laukika and lokottara) referred to in that Gatbā by the tales of Bharata and Jitaśatru for which Harişeņa has no counterparts. Obviously Śrfcandia has some additional, earlier sources before him for these. Sricandra's