________________
INTRODUCTION
Of course it is equally possible that both of them are imitating traditional, stereotyped descriptions.
The MS. evidence shows that the age of Līlāyati will have to be placed before A. D. 1208. The references and allusions to or the quotations from the Lilavati in subsequent works indicate that this poem is earlier than Vägbhata, Trivikrama, Nemicandra, Hemacandra, Dhaneśvara, Bhoja and Anandavardhana (840-870 A. D.), i. e., earlier than 840 A. D. Then alone Jineśvara could imitate its title; and this period fairly explains the reference to Rästrakūtas and Calukyas in the text. How much earlier it was composed, it cannot be said definitely. Its indebtedness to the works of Kalidasa, Baña and Harsa is quite apparent and to those of Vakpati and Haribhadra (c. 750 A.D.) is highly probable. So the author of the Lilavati flourished sometime between the dates of Haribhadra and Anandavardhana; and we may tentatively assign the composition of the Lilavati to circa 800 A.D.'
h) Prakrit Dialect of the poem This Lilavati attracts our attention not only as a romantic piece of literature but also as an important poem in the Middle Indo-Aryan the dialectal traits of which have a special significance. The author has composed it in Prakrta or Prakrit language ( pāyayãe bhásáe) using very few Deśi words (paviraladesi-sulakkham) as requested by his beloved (gătha 41). Further, in one of the concluding gathās (No. 1330), he specifies that the language of the poem is marahattha-desi-bhasa.
Much has been written on the meaning of terms like Prakrta, Apabhramsa and Desi bhasa. The term Präkrit in its wider sense has signified the entire range of Middle Indo Aryan and at times even New Indo-Aryan. To begin with it signified the 'natural expressions of the people in general as distinguished from the polished ones of the learned in particular; and with the lapse of time this common language of the masses was raised to a literary status and perpetuated in literature. Thus Prakrit
1. Dr. V. Raghavan observes thus in his review of the Lilavati (Hindu, Mad
ras, 6th July 1952). It may be pointed out that a śilămegha, king of Ceylon, associated with the composition of the Sinhalese treatise Siya-baslakara, is known about the time which is reasonable for the Lilavai, viz.,
circa 800 A.D.' 2. Pischel : Grammatik der Prakrit-sprachen, Strassburg 1900, pp. 1-47;
Grierson : On the Modern Indo-Aryan Vernaculars, Indian Antiquary 1931-33; A.N. Upadhye : Prakrit Literature, Encyclopedia of Literature, New York 1946; etc.
Jain Education International
For Private & Personal Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
