Book Title: Sambodhi 1998 Vol 21 Author(s): J B Shah, N M Kansara Publisher: L D Indology AhmedabadPage 69
________________ 64 SATYAVRAT SAMBODHI younger brother. In view of the broad concurrence of the sources, Punyakusala has drawn upon both. Wherever the sources differ substantially, he has often opted for Hemacandra's version. The contents of the first canto of the BBM owe themselves partly to the Adipurāna and partly to Hemacandra. While the lovely sketch of the femaleguards of the fields, as drawn in the BBM (I. 38) is inspired by the corresponding vibrant description of the village-belles in Jinasena (XXXV. 32-36); the description of the four-fold forces of Bāhubali and their training camp (BBM., I. 42-47, 50-51) has evidently sprung from the TSSpc. (I. 5-55-57). For the lovely account of the affluence of the market of Taxila (BBM I. 56-57) and the life-like sketch of Bahubalī (BBM. I. 70-71) Punyakušala is indebted to both his sources. The events detailed in the second canto also accord, almost entirely, with its sources. As the two had described Bharata's Satkhandavijaya elsewhere, they have refrained from repeating it in the present context, though Jinasena has made a covert hint to it here also. In imitation of his sources, Punyakusala is convinced that Bharata deserved Bāhubali's submission both because of his age and Cakravartin status. The rejection of the envoy's reckless proposal by Bahubali, as described in canto three, also has its genesis in the aforesaid sources. The author of the Adipurāna has sought to air his political equipment in technical phraseology, while Hemacandra has repudiated the envoy with well-reasoned arguments. Both have denounced Bharata's message to Bāhubali as a fradulent conspiracy. To Jinasena it is khalācāra (35-94), Hemacandra has ridiculed it as bakacestā (1. 5. 128). Punyakušala has likened Bharata's lust for expansion to the submarine fire (III. 14). In detailing the rest of the basic story Punyakušala has invariably followed • Hemacandra some of whose ideas and phrases also he has liberally incorporated. The most glaring difference between the two versions of the story concerns itself with the culmination of the clash the war. The three-day long encounter between the rival forces as described in canto fifteen, is not even remotely hinted in Punyakusala's sources. The description is doubtless based on Māgha's account of the clash between the armies of Krsna and Siśupāla (Canto XVIII). Jinasena and Hemacandra betray substantial differences in dealing with the final combat and the events that precede it. While it is the prominent ministers whoPage Navigation
1 ... 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196