________________
OCTOBER, 1925)
SARALA AND DEVADARU
181
SARALA AND DEVADARU.
BY JYOTISCHANDRA GHATAK, MA. FOR a very long time there has been prevalent among both Indian and Western scholas a genuine confusion as to the exact signification of the names of the two trees, 'Sarala' and 'Devad&ru'. Some have boldly identified the 'Sarala' with the 'Devadaru '; others have shown diffidence as to the identity, but have not been able to draw a satisfactory line of demarcation between the two; while still others have maintained a sceptical silence. As a matter of fact the actual difference between the two trees is too wide to have given rise to any real difficulty. This will be evident from the following article. The various lexi. cons, works on Rhetorio, poems, treatises on Ayurveda, works on Botany, Pharmacopæa, popular and scientific nomenclature, books on economic and commercial products, all agree in speaking to the same effect, and thus confirm what I have just now said. Even a careful exam. ination of the various passages of Raghuvamsam, Kumara simbhavam and Meghadata, in which the words occur, would show that the poet Kalidas was also quite aware of this difference.
Lau me, first of all, discuss the theme from the side of Lexicons : (1) Amarasimha speaks clearly enough. He has not only given the names of the
two trees in two different places, but has inserted the names of various other trees between them. He has given seven other names for 'Devadaru', and two other
names for Sarala.' cf. (a)............Sakrapadapah paribhadrakah
Bhadradaru drukilimam pitadaru ca daru cá, Patikdsthanica sapta syurdevadaruni. (S1. 54.)
(6) Pitadruß Saralak pitikdgtham. (81. 60.) It is apparent from the quotation that Putikastha is a common name for both trees. But this is no argument in favour of identifying them. To cite an instance,
Dvija' means both a 'twice-born caste' and 'tooth', but this does not imply that a twice-born caste is a tooth. (2) The Visva-prakasa lexicon points out the actual difference between the two, by placing them side by side, while giving the various meanings of the word
Deva-kartha. Cf. Devakdahantu Sarala-devad&ru-mahi ruhoh. (3) The lexicon Medint also very similarly draws a distinction, while giving the
various meanings of Pati-kastha.' Cf. Patiklethantu Sarala-devad Aru-mahi ruhôh. (4) Even the lexicographer Kekavasvámin seems to have recognised the distinction;
when giving the various meanings of the word Daru, he writes : “Daru kdsthe kli punar devadáruni"--and again when giving the meanings of
pitadaru, he says: Pitadaru punah klivam devaddruni candane. But when giving the meaning of
Sarala, he identifies the tree with Patikasthahvaya-druma.
From the above it will be evident that of all the names of the Devadaru tree, viz. Daru, Pita-ddru, Amara-pádapa, etc., Devadaru' was the one most generally known and most commonly used. This is the reason why in explaining the meaning of the other names of the tree, the term 'Devadaru 'has always been used. If 'Sarala' meant the samé tree as
Devadaru,'our lexicographer must have chosen that very word (inasmuch as it is the most popular of all its synonyms), instead of such an ambiguous term as pūtikástha, which, according to Amarasimha and a few other lexicographers, means both 'Sarala' and Devadaru'. (Vide above.) Besides, in a very large majority of treatises, 'Patike, tha' is exclugively used for the Sarala' tree alone. The author of the Sabda-Candrika, for example, gives
