Critical Introduction to Panhavagara

Author(s): Amulyachandra Sen
Publisher: Amulyachandra Sen

Page 19

~ 12 - Another proof of the late date of the text is that in section C and D of chap 5 (p 94a) have been referred to the "hundred crafts") sippa-sayam and the "sixty-four qualities of women'?) causatthim ca mahila-gune only in those brief words and without mentioning the detailed enumeration, and in the same manner the "seventytwo arts”3) have been referred to by mentioning only the first, second and the last of the items, kalão ya bävattarım sunipunão leh'āıyão sauna-ruyâvasānão ganiya-ppahănão*) This tendency towards brevity is rather surprising in our text for it seems to delight, on every page, in describing things or enumerating numbers in the niravaśesa manner, as the Jaina calls it Its verbosity in the matter of setting out epithets and synonyms, its fondness for listing at great length whatever comes under description or enumeration, are a special feature of our text and there appears to be so studied and deliberate a tendency in it towards reaching perfection in the direction of making all-comprehensive indices surpassing its forerunners that it reminds one of Kālıdāsa's words "sarvôpamā-dravyasamuccayena, yathă-pradeśam vinivesitena") This tendency no doubt marks the zenith of a period of composition when "listing for listing's sake" of the later period had not come into vogue but yet listing in course of description was a laudable quality This verbosity in itself is a mark of late age and inspite of it when our text refrains from mentioning in details the "seventy-two arts" etc just referred to, it was because those particular details were well· known and had become antiquated, and this further emphasises the
distance of time between those texts on the one hand which interested themselves in those old-fashioned details, and our text on the other
1) These are, according to Sânticandra's commentary on Jambud, the crafts of the potter, the smith, the painter, the weaver and the barber - each divided into twenty varieties (these have not been stated)
2) These are also named by Sānticandra and have been discussed by - Venkatasubbiah, The Kaläs, Adyar 1911 1 3) See Uvav § 107, also discussed by Venkatasubbiah and trans by Barnett, Antag, p 30—31
4) leh' äiya and ganıyasppahāna is perhaps a virodha, for the list runs as leham, ganiyam etc
5) Kumāras I 49