________________
37
Candragupta. The Jaina references are mostly found in the form of narration, giving very little scope for dialogues. The epithets used for Candragupta are ‘vatsa' or 'rājan' and not a term like ‘vrşala' showing disregard towards Candragupta. it is irrational, illogical and not at all convincing that the intelligent and towering person like Cāņakya addresses the emperor in such a reproachful manner. [9] Conflict between Cāņakya and Candragupta :
The psudo-conflict (Kệtaka-Kalaha) between Cāņakya and Candragupta which is depicted in the third act of the drama, has no scope in the Jaina literature. Some scholars suggest that there is a possibility of true conflict between Cāņakya and Candragupta due to the identity crisis of both the personalities in the last lapse of the life of Cāņakya. We do not find neither true conflict or pseudoconflict between Cāņakya and Candragupta in the Jaina references.
The Svetāmbaras depict a conflict between Bindusāra, the son of Candragupta and Cāņakya. The conflict was deliberately created by Subandhu (most probably the Jaina counterpart of Amātya Rākşasa) and the conflict terminated into the terrible death of Cāņakya. Like Viśākhadatta, the Jainas also wish to depict Cāņakya as one-stepahead of his enemy. Therefore with a great conspiracy, Cāņakya managed to end the life of Subandhu. [10] Use of Prakrits in the Mudrārākṣasa :
Prakrit languages are profusely used in the Mudrārākṣasa and it is very amusing that Cāņakya-Candragupta narratives are available in the Jaina Prakrit literature from the 4th century A.D. upto the 15th century A.D.
The Prakrits used in the Mudrārākṣasa are mainly Māgadhi, Saurasenī and Māhārāștrī. Other sub-dialects are also employed
