Gaudavaho

Author(s): Vakpatiraj, Narhari Govind Suru, P L Vaidya, A N Upadhye, H C Bhayani
Publisher: Prakrit Text Society Ahmedabad

Page 66

( xlix )
tells us that the the Gaüdavaho, named Kahāvidham ( 97475 ) is finished, which means that the Kathāpitha part or prelude of the Gaüdavaho is finished. In this context, the reading “Gaüdavahe' (locative) suggested by Bühler appears cogent, as it will then mean “In Gaüdavaho, the kathāpītha has been finished.”
The absence of chapters or divisions like Āśvāsakas etc. can be no argument for any one to infer that the present Gaüdavaho is an epitome. No doubt, the Mahākāvyas like the Setubandha have such divisions. But, the prose compositions, like the Kādambari of Bāna or the Vāsavadattā of subandhu (whom the Poet admires ) have a continuous, undivided narrative without chapters. Līlāvatī, a Jain Mahākavya by Koūhala, a later poet, has also no divisions in it.
The reason why he has not divided the big bulk of his Poem into chapters is to be sought in the character and composition of the Gaüdavaho. His writing, as can be observed, is mainly Kulakapradhāna i.e.- in groups of verses, small and big, each group having one idea, theme or topic, loosely connected with the main story in its last Gāthā. The Kulaka is like a cavalcade or a caravan of cars, ( each unit giving one idea ), passing in a procession before our eyes, with its last unit carrying a flag to indicate whose-who or whom it belongs to. The Poet has chosen this Form, and not the conventional, uniform pattern of chapters or cantos, with the sole idea of ensuring fullest freedom for his poetic Muse, as she sallys and scars with her wild flights of Fancy, untrammelled by any restrictive norms laid down for a Mahākāvya by rhetoricians like Dandin or Bhāmaha. In this respect, we may say that like his revered Guru Bhavabhūti, he, too, is a rebel against standardisation of poetic Form.