Indian Antiquary Vol 53

Author(s): Richard Carnac Temple, Stephen Meredyth Edwardes, Krishnaswami Aiyangar
Publisher: Swati Publications

Page 15

JANUARY, 1924 ]
VASUBANDHU OR SUBANDHU
brought to the notice of scholars by Prof. Pathak. The half-verse is followed by a short gloss by the author in explanation of the same. The half-verso and the gloss are given below.? It occurs under the sutra defining Ojas.
The translation of the hemistich would run thus, "This very son of Chandragupta, the young Chandraprakasa, the patron of men of letters, fortunate in the success of his efforts, has now (samprati) become king." The author explains the passage further in the gloss of the sutra, that the phrase, “Patron of men of letters" is an instance of "allusion," oon. taining a reference to the ministership (sáchirya) of Vasubandhu.
This reading of the passage and the comment thereon were first challenged by Mahamahopadhyaya Haraprasada Sastri, who said that the oorrect reading of the passage should be cha Subandhu in the place of Vasubandhu, and maintained that most of the manuscripts of Vamana's work examined, had the reading Subandhu. He thought that the passage contained a reference to Subandhu, the author of the Sanskrit romance Vasavadatta. He also raised the objootion that Vasubandhu, who was a famous orthodox Buddhist Bhikshu, would not have accepted the office of minister under a sovereign. He took Chandraprakasa in the passage to be the name of Chandragupta's son, and suggested that the emperor Chandragupta II had two sons, Chandraprakasa and Kumaragupta, and that upon the death of Chandragupta II, a civil war broke out between the two brothers, in which, however, Chan. draprakasa was worsted and Kumâragupta was successful. .
This interpretation of the passage was objected to by Dr. Hoernle, who thought that the correct reading was Vasubandhu and not Subandhu. He answered Mah. H. P. Sastri's objection that a Buddhist monk would not accept office, by saying that the word "sdchivya " which occurs in the passage may simply mean companionship or friendship. He took the word Chandrapraksa as the name of Chandragupta's son. But unlike the Sastri, he does not deduce out of the passage & civil war, which broke out on the death of Chandragupta II between his two sons. He says, "Is it not much simpler to suppose that Chandragupta II's son was known as Chandraprakása, before he assumed the regnal title Kumaragupta upon his accession to the throne.
Mf. R. Narasimhacharya of Mysore (ante, Vol. XL), referring to the same passage, says that his examination of various manuscripts of Vamana's sutras showed that the correct reading of the disputed portion of the passage was cha Subandhu and not Vasubandhu. He says "in the well known tenth verse of Vasavadatta, Subandhu mourns the death of Vikramaditya, i.e., Chandragupta II, who was apparently his patron. There is nothing unreasonable in supposing that he became the minister of Chandragupta's son, Kumâragupta.” It might be urged against this supposition that Subandhu, who mentions Udyotakara, and according to some manuscripts, Dharmakîrti's works, could not have been & contemporary of Kumaragupta, who lived in the first half of the fifth century. But according to him, this does not raise any difficulty about the chronology, since the dates of the Udyőtakara and Dharma. kirti have not been settled. He thought that the half verse occurring in Vamana's work is a quotation from the introductory portion of some drama, giving the Satradhâra's words.
Again Prof. K. B. Pathak wrote in ante, Vol. XL, 1911, p. 170, "Kumâragupta, son of Chandragupta II, is alluded to by Vámana, as a patron of the Buddhist author, Vasubandhu." Vagubandhu was according to him the contemporary of three successive Gupta sovereigns,
3 साभिप्रायत्वं यथा
सोऽयं संप्रति चन्द्रगुप्ततनयश्चन्द्रप्रकाशो युवा जातोभूपतिराश्रयः कृतषियो दिष्टपाकृतार्थश्रमः । भाषयावषिषामित्यस्व पपन्यापिम्या पक्षाप परत्वात्सामिप्रायत्री।