________________
Tessitori's Pioneering Work on the Uvaeśamālā ... : 93
the understanding of difficult passages, for the elucidation of the so-called “local" Prakrit words explained in the commentaries by their common Sanskrit equivalents, or takes note of their grammatical observations. For this purpose, these commentaries are sufficient, and Tessitori had apparently no other choice. Nevertheless, the importance of the older commentaries must not be underestimated: apart from being indispensable for a study of the narratives, they also occasionally bring valuable information about the textual tradition itself when proposing alternate readings (pāthāntara) which show how a text could be submitted to correction, revision and discussion within the Jaina tradition.
Another means to assess the place of a work such as the Uvaesamālā is to try to see what its impact has been on the literary tradition. In several cases, important Jaina works can be compared to planets, around which a group of satellites develop and leads its own life. This is what seems to have happened with the stock of narratives mentioned in the Uvaesamālā. Thus, apart from the direct commentaries, we have simile (pseudo)- commentaries, such as the collection of stories with which I started this talk: they do not belong as such to any of the complete commentaries on the Uvaesamālā, but insofar as they start with a stanza of this work which they develop and help to understand, they belong to the same circle. We have also other works showing the same literary form which either refer to the Uvaesamālā or implicitly borrow from it. A very clear case is provided by a work composed in 858 by a certain Jayasimhasūri: his Dharmopadeśamālāvivarana is a work similar to our Uvaesamālā, although much shorter. The verses include certain teachings and refer to heroes who exemplify them. In some cases, the author himself develops the relevant stories in simple Prakrit prose; in many other cases, he only gives a sketch of it, and refers to the Uvaesamālā for more details, or even refrains from writing any story and is satisfied with a mere reference to the Uvaesamālā 20, which means that the author considered this work to be the basis of his own recast. It would be equally easy
