Bruhat Katha kosha

SR No.: 016060
Original Sutra Author: Harishen Acharya
Publisher: Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan
Publication Year: 1943
Total Pages: 566
Language: Prakrit, Sanskrit
Classification: Dictionary & Dictionary
File Size: 16 MB

Page 122

INTRODUCTION
that Kathakośa was composed by many monk-poets before his time; Śrīcandra complains possibly against some predecessor who gave only the stories without giving and explaining the contextual gāthās from the Bha. A., and we find that this complaint suits very well with HK which does not give the găthās. Going into more details, we find that Sricandra omits, sometimes at times with specific remarks, some of the stories found according to corresponding sequence in HK. I have not been able to detect in ŚK the tales corresponding to Nos. 73, 79, 83-4, 99, 102*9, 107, 123, 125, and 149 of HK. With regard to Nos. 73, 83 and 84, Sricandra plainly says that Yasodhara's tale is too well-known to be given and the stories of Bhārata and Rāmāyana are endless. This means that the stories were present in his sources, but he
n them. As far as I have inspected the Ms., he quietly passes over the remaining numbers; and it is difficult to gauge the reasons of this omission. There are reasons to believe that besides HK, Sricandra might have used other sources also including perhaps some commentaries on the Bha. A. Looking at the facts that Prabhăcandra, Srīcandra and Nemidatta quote the 2nd găthā of Bha, A. (the first two, along with the first gāthā), that the colophons of some of the opening stories of PK and NK show that there could be some stories connected with Darśanoddyota, and that Sricandra also illustrates twofold Uddyotana, we are led to the presumption that in an earlier source some stories were connected with the 2nd gātha of Bha. Ā. which is not illustrated by Harişeņa in any way.
this context Sricandra gives the stories of Bharata and Titaśatru as examples of Laukika and Lokottara Uddyotana, and for these there are no corresponding tales in HK. Secondly, if SK were to be solely based on HK, it is difficult to explain certain phonetic difference seen in some of the proper names: Śrīcandra reads Jasahara, Vissambhara, Doņimaṁta and Kuccavāra (PK Droņimati 90*30, Kucavāra 39), while Harişeņa reads in corresponding contexts Yasoratha, Vişamdhara, Tonimam and Küpakāra (Nos. 5, 54, 95). Lastly, if Sricandra followed only the text of HK, apparently there is no reason why some of the Sanskrit verses, which are given by him as quotations, should widely differ in readings from those still present in the Kośa of Harișeņa. We might compare 54. 17-8, 57. 518-9, and 143. 37-39 with the extracts given by me in the Notes. There are major differences in the readings; as they are being preserved in the body of an Apabhramśa text, that they are quotations is quite apparent; and if Sricandra took them from HK, he would not change them, because he is quoting. So my explanation is that Sricandra has before him some additional sources, perhaps common with those used by Harişeņa; Sricandra quotes them perhaps as they are; Harişeņa, however, retouches those verses because some of them are to form a part of his running Sanskrit text, and they are not necessarily quotations with him in the strict sense of the term. Just in this mannar Amitagati also rewrites in his own words some of the verses which stood as quotations in the Präkrit source used by him in composing his Dharma.