________________
78
INTRODUCTION
e been & "
Possibly, saza but
algulistitut were in its e
the verb form “could be” being understood. I have not gone out of mg way to impose hiatus or starred readings. The particle hi is the general N method of avoiding hiatus across the caesura in 13°, and has been retained also because its emphasis is not out of place in the context. For the rest, some of our scribes have seen a hiatus where none oxisted, as in 142° where ratyanta, has been taken as a mislection of sorts for atyanta. There may have been a real hiatus in 28% concealed by payasā svālma, but the evidence is insufficient. Possibly, a case for hiatus may also be made out in place of jarayā yāty ujjvalam in 1974, but I prefer to see confusion due most probably to haplography or the occasional substitution of juty- for yūly-; moreover, it would be more natural to have some verb here in its explicit form.
It was gratifying to find several of these restorations supported lig version Q, such as 1536, 61704, 115, 148, 249"
V. Who was Bhartrhari ?* 5.1. The problem of identification. We are now left with a set of verses grouped in order of probability, which show slow growth over the centuries, but with a substantial nucleus which must have been original. A characteristic of the oldest portion is its compression, with a philosophy which makes a strong impression upon the reader of a marked literary physiognomy. That Bhartrhari was a mere anthologist is a view not uncommon among scholars, but an anthologist or for that matter any successful writer would have left us a better unified collection, as for example happens in the southern versions of archetype delta. The solution which I have proposed is that the collection is an anthology of verses believed to have been Bhartphari's by later compilers. Stanza 63 occurs in Kālidāsa's Sakuntala, though as gonuine Bhartrhari as any other known. Others are found in the oldest layer of the Pañcatantra as restored by Edgerton. If, therefore, one man wroto these verses, he must belong to the opening centuries of the Christian era; one of his stanzas current as a subhāşita could therefore appear without stigma of plagiarism as part of the advice given to Kalidāsa's heroine. One type of critic, of course, compares the two poets, concluding that Kālidāsa being the greater Bharthari inust necessarily have borrowed from him, hence be an anthologist. An extension of this argument may be seen in the suggestion thrust upon me that my type of text-criticism was futile; to odit Bhartrhari, all one should have to do would be to select the best stanzas, the second-rate being discarded as unworthy of the great poet. Such a procedure is difficult of execution for the tremendous stanza 301, as great as any other in the whole volume, is omitted in two well-determined versions, while the beantifully written re re cătaka [721 ) is found only in W.
Three stanzas seem to furnish some evidence for a date not earlier than that proposed above, i, e. the opening centuries of the Christian era. No. 257°, discussed before, mentions the pale complexion of Sakr maidens; less easy to date would be the hermaphrodite Siva of 924", and the ten
This section condenses the views expressed in two articles of mine : 1 ] J. Oriental Research [ Madras] XV, 1946 pp. 61-77; 2] Bluciratiya Vidyci VII, 1946, pp. 49-62,
Jain Education International
For Private & Personal Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
