Tilakmanjarisara

SR No.: 002611
Original Sutra Author: Pallipal Dhanpal
Author: N M Kansara
Publisher: L D Indology Ahmedabad
Publication Year: 1969
Total Pages: 146
Language: Sanskrit, English
Classification: Book_Devnagari & Literature
File Size: 7 MB

Page 46

37
TMS and the TMKS respectively have preferred to incorporate such verses without the slightest change. (2) A beautiful hymn to Jina Rsabha.78--
शुष्कशिखरिणि कल्पशाखीव निधिरधनग्राम इव ।
कमलषण्ड इव मारवेऽध्वनि भवभीमारण्य इह वीक्षितोऽसि मुनिनाथ ! कथमपि ॥ etc. of the original has been marred in the adaptation in the TMKU as -
भरतश्चिन्तामणिः पाणिं कल्पद्रुमे गृहाङ्गणम् । कामधुग्वेश्मनो मध्यमध्यास्तेऽद्य त्वदीक्षणात् ।। निःशेषसुखकन्दानाममन्दानां कुकर्मणाम् ।
स्थान संसारकान्तारमतीतोऽद्य त्वदीक्षणात् ॥ TMKU. 946-47. which cannot stand comparision with the beautifully lucid, though simple, adaptation by Pallipāla Dhanapāla in his TMS as
तुष्टावाथ-"जगन्नाथ ! संसारक्षारवारिधौ। ऋते त्वद्दर्शनादन्यदमृतप्रदनामृतम् ॥ अस्मा देव यतो देव ! सङ्कल्पितफलप्रदः ।
पुण्यकल्पद्रुमः प्राणिसन्दोहस्य प्ररोहति ॥ TMS. IV. 89-90. Even this is only tolerable, since it would have been better if both of them had chosen to keep the original intact, as has been done by Lakşmidhara ! (3) A fine suggestive Arya verse-70
तव राजहंस ! हंसीदर्शनमुदितस्य विस्मृतो नूनम् ।
सरसिजवनप्रवेशः समयेऽपि विलम्बसे तेन ॥has been totally replaced in the TMKU as
उत्फुल्लाननपद्मायां पद्मिन्यां स्नेहवानपि।
भानुः सकलकार्याणां समयं न विलङ्घते ॥ TMKU. 990. -,which not only omits the suggestive reference to the recent attainment of the Vidyādhara kingdom by Harivāhana who has only just come to see Tilakamañjari, but also spoils the polite, though direct reminder about "getting late," by replacing it with a rather rash, though indirect, reminder about "negligence of proper time'. It is only a slight difference of degree and emphasis, but exhibits a huge difference in poetic approach, when it is remembered that Harivāhana then was not a mere human king, but an emperor (cakravarti) of the whole of the northern range of the Vijayārdha mountain. It is again significant that both Palli. pala Dhana pala and Lakşmidhara have preferred to adopt the original in the body of their respective texts, rather than trying to mishandle, omit or replace it.
As a result of the above changes introduced by the author of the TMKU, and his peculiar approach to the story of the TM, some damage has also been done to the story aud characterisation of the original. Thus: 75. ibid. p. 218 (9 ff.) 76. ibid. p. 232 (11 ff.).
roach to the story of the Tr, some damage
____Jain Education International 2010_05