________________
Didactic Works in Präkrit
215
of ancient times obtained liberation. The breach of good conduct however is equally disastrous and many have suffered on account of it. In course of his advice he quotes a verse from the Daśavaikälika as being the Agama. As usual the work is replete with allusions to the ancient sages and mythical persons. This fact has given the commentator an opportunity to load his comment with long stories about them which alone gives some value to it.
Silopadeśamālā is better in many respects than the works of Asadha both in style and poetic ability of the writer even though it reaches no high mark in both. The author has expressed himself in clear and not uninteresting terms and it makes a smooth reading.
Upadeśacintāmaņi is another Prākrit work of this nature and is written by Jayasekharasūri. He was a pupil of Mahendraprabha and a co-student of Muniśekhara and Merutunga. He wrote along with it a commentary on the work in A. D. 1379. The book is divided into four chapters and contains moral advice. A little later lived Munisundara who wrote the Upadeśaratnākara. He belonged to the Tapāgaccha and was given the title
lisarasvati. Born in A. D. 1379 he became a monk in 1386, a Vācaka in 1409, Sūri in 1420 and died in A. D. 1446. His book consists of three chapters called Tatas each of which is divided into four Ambas with a further sub-division into Tarangas. The author has written a commentary on it, but it is available upto the end of the second chapter.
In conclusion we can note the less known works, the Dhādasī gāthās 36 in number of an unknown author but earlier than Śrutasāgara who quotes a verse from it, and therefore earlier than the 16th century; a Vairāgyaśataka of 104 verses teaching renunciation by describing the horrible state of this life; the Indriyajayaśataka with 102 verses, the Sambodhasaptatīkā of one Jayasekhara; the Hitacarana of Sakalacandra written in A. D. 1573; the Dharmopadeśa of Laksmīvallabha written in A. D. 1688 and consisting of 107 verses and many smaller Kulakas of little importance.
This brief review of the didactic works is sufficient to show that these works are not so much important for their poetic quality in which all of them deplorably lack, nor for the short and pithy statements full of wisdom which make the Sanskrit works of this type so much valued, but for the sincerity of the writer's mind who believes firmly in the creed he is preaching and has devoted his life for its cause and earnestly wishes the welfare of his readers.
Didactic Works in Prākrit
JUB Vol. VI, Part III 1937