________________
Prakrit Verses of Pādalipta
137
6. Kavidarpaņa, ed. by H. D. Velankar, 1962. For the paņatthirā
of the Siddhahema MS., and paņațțhirā of the Sarasvatikanthābharaṇa, the Kavidarpaña commentary reads paņacciyā, which points to a probable panaccirā. Also it has wrongly camdulloo.
for caídujjoo. 7. Pitāmbara and Bhuvanapāla both give Vallabha as the name
of the author of this Gāthā. Among the author names traditionally recorded by some commentators (see, for example, Appendix no. 3 in Joglekar's edition) we find Pālitta (variants : Pālittaka, Pālita etc.) in the case of several Gathās according to this or that source. See Gāthās no. 63, 74, 217, 254, 256. 257, 262, 393, 394, 417, 425, 432, 433, 434, 545, 578, 609, 623, 706, 720. Some of these Gāthās (e.g. no. 63, 217, 262, 394, 434, 578, 623) are noteworthy for their striking image or telling description, and their kinship with some of the descriptive Gāthās of the TL. cannot be easily dismissed as accidental. But for accepting any of them as Pādalipta's some independent
support is necessary. 8. Gāthas no. 89, 173, 293, 403 etc. also are attributed to Pottisa
by various commentaries. 9. L. Alsdorf, “The Vasudevahindi, a specimen of Archaic Jain
Māhärașțri', BSOS, 8, 1936, p. 319-333. 10. For a detailed appreciation, See TL., pp. 283–285. 11. See for example TL. Gāthās no. 10, 12, 17, 21, 31, 34, 36,
40, 89, 94, 175, 185, 189, 490, 542, 548, 586, 647, 711, 770, 863, 888, 892, 896, 942, 1064, 1067, 1072, 1095, 1155, 1300,
1358, 1386 etc. 12. Ed. by A. N. Upadhye, 1959. On pp. 86-87 of Kuvalayamālā
pt. 2 (1970), Upadhye has pointed out certain general resemblances in ideas and narrative points between the TL. and the Kuvalayamālā. He thinks that, 'as the original T[aramgavati] is no more available, verbal agreements here and there carry
no special significance.' 13. Ed. by A. N. Upadhye, 2nd ed., 1966.
