________________
KUVALAYAMĀLĀ
external characteristics of samyaktva are given in both the works (Sk 48-9, Km § 337). If H describes the birth of a god in short (Sk 56-7), U gives elaborate details (Km §§ 172 f.). In Sk (488 f.) a friend of the earlier birth comes to enlighten and put the other on the right track: this, of course, is the very contract between the five souls whose biographies are narrated in Km. There is a context of enlightenment by seeing some memento, ear-rings in Sk (477.15) but jewel images in Km (102.29). Memory of earlier life, often given by a Kevalin, and confusion of relations in the same birth are seen in both the works (Sk 476.7 f. & Km 93.34 f., 79.12). A contemporary Tīrthakara in Videha is consulted in Sk (473.16 f.), so also in Km which graphically describes the conditions in that area Km (243.13 f.) The dikṣā ceremony described in Sk (181.16 f.), deserves to be compared with that in Km (208.30 f.) and elsewhere. What Sikhikumāra observes about inescapable Death (Sk 186) is very close to what Ratnamukuta has realised in his attempt to save the butterfly from death (Km § 230). Religious discourses on the duties of laymen and monks (Sk 48-49, Km 91.21 f.) are usual in both the works.
90
Certain characters, contexts and motifs in Km remind the reader of similar ones in Sk. Māyāditya pushing Sthānu into the well (Km 61.21) has his counterpart in Anahaka doing the same for Candrasara (Sk 99). Labhadeva pushing down Bhadra on high seas (Km 67.15 f.) is something like Droṇaka pushing down Vīradeva from a jutty (Sk 105: the word nijjuhaga occurs in both the contexts). A confused treacherous friend, Dhanadeva, figures in Amaragupta's tale (Sk 104) and resembles Māyāditya (Km 58.22 f.). Dhana and Sagaradatta are similar characters who want to give dana from the wealth earned on personal initiative and not out of ancestral property: the idea is expressed almost alike in both the works (Sk 195.15-6, see also 409.9 f.; Km 103.23). Though the contexts are somewhat different, a girl is hanging herself for the sake of her lover (Sk 346.12 f.; Km 53.6-9, 107.10 f.). In Sk (469.17 f.) a monk is made to dance, while a monk enacts rāsa-naccana in Km (4.25 f.) to enlighten a band of robbers. The details of the attack of Sabaras in both the texts have some common words (Sk 537.4 f., Km 135.27 f.) apart from the similarity of the context. The idea of a horse carrying the prince into the forest is common to both the texts (Sk 671.11 f. Km § 61).
same.
The religious, social and cultural background in Sk and Km is nearly the In the details about marriage, of a party of merchants preparing for land or sea travel, the procession of a prince entering the metropolis etc. have much in common both with H and U.
Taking an overall view certain areas of difference are striking. H is more self-confident in narrating his tales: that may be the reason why he does not introduce the sajjana-durjana topic, and why he does not make any reference to earlier authors and works. His build-up and narration of stories have a classical background and training; while U is popular in taste and aiming at wider appeal. The Gathas of H are metrically perfect, but they do not possess the liquidity, smoothness and ring of those of U with whom they have a natural outflow as it were from the mouth of a gifted singer. Both H and U are contemporaries. The language of H, however, is more learned in its make-up and style,
Jain Education International
For Private & Personal Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
