Dhurtakhyan

SR No.: 001861
Original Sutra Author: Haribhadrasuri
Author: Jinvijay
Publisher: Saraswati Pustak Bhandar Ahmedabad
Publication Year: 2002
Total Pages: 160
Language: Sanskrit, Prakrit, Gujarati
Classification: Book_Devnagari, Story, Literature, P000, & P030
File Size: 14 MB

Page 69

38
DHŪRTAKHYĀNA : sequence of narration; and he attempts to include most of the ideas from the original, at times in identical expressions (Pl. I. 76, Sk. 66 etc.). He is more after narrating the story with as few secondary details as possible. Whenever there are lengthy descriptions in the Prākrit text, he either summarises them or adds his own with a bit of independence. It may be that even metrical exigencies have frustrated his attempts to be more close and literal in his rendering. Sometimes he expresses the original with remarkable compactness (verses 82, 103, etc.) and in a few cases with elegance and beauty (125, etc.). He shows that he is fairly acquainted with the details of Purā ņic mythology : the proper names are freely substituted by other synonyms (Svāmin - Skanda, Mahāsena = Şaņmukha, etc.); once an additional source, Bharata (102) is rightly added; and sometimes are added supplementary details, such as, the names Dhūmorņā and Nahuşa (verses 351, 385) and the birth of Kārtikeya for the destruction of Tārakāsura (204 f.). Sometimes his references to the sources are not quite to the point (169) and in one place (106) it is a bit obscure.
Perhaps a verse between Nos. 86 and 87 is missing. Possibly in his zeal of summarising the story, Sanghatilaka skips over certain portions of the Prakrit text, viz., I. 30-4, V. 115 f. The contents of some verses, for instance, III. 83, V. 80, are not fully covered: the latter, it may be noted presents some difficulties of interpretation. The legend of Varāha lifting the earth (III. *10*) is missed by him, somewhere between verses 236-38. As to the quotations in the original, it appears that the author wants to present his text purely in Sanskrit: some of the Prākrit quotations (II. 50, III. 67) are nicely rendered into Sanskrit (125, 215); some of those in Sanskrit are duly reproduced; but it is difficult to say why some (II. 73, IV. 92, V, 4, 5, 103) are skipped over without any trace.
More than once Sanghatilaka not only shows difference in ideas but also adds new ideas, when compared with the Prākrit original (see for instance: Nos. 210, 23d, 1596, 1610, 199d, 2046, 239d, 242d, 243d, 316ab, 409d, 416d, etc.). Some of these are apt similes, quite creditable to any poet.
There are many places where one can easily take exception to Sanghatilaka's rendering of the original: lhasiya-celan (I. 60)=dūşita-vāsasam (52); seam (I. 74)= sesam (64); Sea-kurd ali nāma' (I. 75)= Sitakundali-nāmā (65); namiūna Jin varisdom (II. 24)= nrpatin natvà (99)”; phuttar du bhāga. jūyam (II. 29 ) = trividhatām agamat (104); etc. His statement that the urogeny of Gauri and Samkara was required for destroying Tāraka (203–4),
On comparing with the ed. of the commentary, I find an additional verse which
runs thus: 7 HET HE! 19: Tit 224734:1 P EP9 f agfa 1[***] . 2 The Gujaräti text reads S'vetakundali námi. 3 In this particular case, as required by the context, Sanghatilaka appears to have
had before him a reading like namiūņa naravarimdam, beoa use Jina is not at all introduced in the earlier part of the story. The presiding deity is a Yakşa. The Gujarati text also says: rājänē pranami.