365bet娱乐

We shall here discuss the question with reference to various aspects such as the story, motifs, plot-construction, suspense, characters, style and etc., and see how far Bana has influenced Dhanapala and in what ways the latter has tried to excell the former. kixx+HxstoryxxnxthextKRMEXX 11. Magadham No. LL, p. 838-- banam prati dhana 鈥�palasya slokadhye manena pratyetum sakyate | manasi sarvatisayenadara asi diti 12. ibid.; .. na tu kadambari kartu banasya yasastiro dhatumiti 13. Tilakamanjari, Intro,vss.15,17 ab & 18. 14. ibid,,p.215(19): manorabham 0001 spasta pratibhati | vaisampayana sapa katha prakrama mitra duvarna sukranasa durvarnasukranasa yuktiyuktama pyucya- 15. 1b 1d.,p.224(20ff: 2. anupajata pratijnatartha nirvahana manam kidrsam, kim puna rasambhavyamanataya sisujanasyapi hasyavrddhi heturidrsam yacca visad 鈥� 鈥�prati bhasamati dirgha kalamanu bhutamatmanapi sakyate na sraddham | tadvi 鈥�cara catura buddhah kathyamanam mahabhagasya kathamiva pratitiparva bhava tarisyati | ; these remarks of Gandharvaka refer to the parrot-episode.

1023 (i) The Story and the Theme :Bana's Kad. is apparently a transexistentially enduring love and ultimate union of Candsapida and Kadambari on the one hand, and that of Pundarika and Mahasvata on the other hand. From the point of view of the subtle ontogenetically mystical significance, it is, as has been revealed by 16 Dr. Vasudev Sharan Aggrawal, a tale of the eternal natural attraction of human mind towards carnal gratifications, on the one hand, and that of its sublimation, through penance and union with higher wisdom cohabitant with the mystic thousand-petalled cerebral lotus, on the other hand. His other prose-romance, the Harshacharita of Bana, however, is a romantic biography partly of Bana, and mainly of the line of Emperor Harsavardhana of Sthannvisvara. Dhanapala's Tilakamanjari of Dhanapala is apparently a tale of love and union of Harivahana and Tilakamanjari on the one hand, and that of Samaraketu and Malayasundari on the other hand. From the subtle allegorical point of view indirectly revealed by Dhanapala himself, it is a tale of the fall of a celestial soul into the interminable ocean of transmigratory human existence and its ascent to Final Emancipation through the attainment of superhuman powers with the help of True Faith and piety. Thus, though both are similar apparently as tales of 16. Kadambari Eka Samskritika Adhyayana, Appendix 1,pp.333-363.

xiang 1024 love and union of their respective pairs of kras heroes 17 and heroines, they are poles apart so far as their real inner significances are concerned; while Banals significance is microscopically implicit, Dhanapala's allegory is telescopically explicit. Bana preferred to pick up the skeleton for his narrative of the Kad. from the story of Sumanas as told by Gunadhya in his Brhatkatha. Both Prof. S.V.Dixit and Dr.Neeta 19 18 Sharma' have observed that as far as the main outline of the plot is concerned, Bana has followed the original story from the Brhatkatha very faithfully, except on some occasion: especially at the end, and that he has changed the n names of the characters and places; the original story of two births is transformed by Bana into a story of three births. Bana's real poetic power consists in breathing the very life in the skeleton by adding many new situations, new details, new incidents and elaborate descriptions. As has been rightly pointed out by Dr. Neeta Sharma, originalitya does not lie in pure inventiveness but often it lies in the way a poet handles even an ols subject, giving it entirely new shape, and that Bana's originality lies in his style or presentation of the theme. 17.cf.Magadham Vol, I, No. 2, p. 83: purva janmanugata pritireva samanarupena banadhana- palayoh paryanti ke laksyataya pratipadya| Banabhatta, His life and Literature, p.88. ibid., p.103. 18. 20. / 19. Banabhatta, A Literary Study,p.87.

1025 21 Dhanapala seems to have disliked the idea of borrowing, like Bana, a plot almost in extenso from Gunadhya's Brhatkatha. His main objection to such a practice was that a story borrowed from a widely popular work like Brhatkatha badly compared with the original and looked like a patch-work lacking in unity of the plot-structure. A conscious artist as he was, Dhanapala could not put up with this shortcoming and preferred to collect the elements of his story from a source which was not widely known to the non-Jains, and extracted a bare outline of the story which, in the original, ran through numerous intervening sub-stories. He, thus, tried to preserve the quality of newness in the basic story of the main plot. With this he fused another story, that of the by-plot which, for the most part, he invented on the basis of various motifs drawn from contemporary history, literary master-pieces of his predecessors like BAna, Haribhadrasuri and Udyotanasuri. While Bana's story in the Kad. is strangely fantastic and rather unrealistic in view of the lack of parallel births of the heroines corresponding to those of the heroes, Dhanapala has taken special care to make the story of the Tilakamanjari of Dhanapala well-knit and rationalistic. His use of the supernatural, the trans-existential survival of love, the reunion in next birth, the curse, the grace and the accident 21. Tilakamanjari, Intro.vs. 21: satyam brhatkathambhodhe bindumadaya samskrtah | lenetara- kathah kanthah pratibhanti tad 鈥�gratah || : ||

1026 never tax the credibility of the audience, as does the story of Bana's Kad.. And Dhanapala's story is no less "replete with tenderness of human love, beneficence of divine comsolation, the pathos and the sorrow of death and abiding hope of reunion after death as a result of unswerving fidelity 22 to love" 'than is Bana's Kad.. (ii) Motifs :According to Dr. Jagannath Pathaka, the pricipal motifs utilized by Bana in his Kad. are: the lack of a son, a dream signifying imminent conception, union of lovers, kidnapping of the hero, a parrot, a curse, love-letter, aerial flight. To add to these, some of those in the Harshacharita of Bana are; the propitiation of mystic lores, apparition of a giant, conferring of a boon by a goddess, military expedition. Though the principal motifs of Dhanapala's Tilakamanjari of Dhanapala seem to be apparently similar to the above-mentioned ones of both the prose-romances of Bana, they differ vastly in their true nature, their narrative significance, their structural disposition and their rational basis. Thus, though both Meghavahana and Tarapida are worried about the lack of a son, the ways in which they obtain one are quite different; while the former undergoes a session of penance and faces the tough test by the terrific Vetala much in the same manner as Sri-Harsavardhana's forefather Puspabhuti did for the 22.cf. A History of Sanskrit Literature, p.324.

$ 鉁� 1027. sake of Bhairavacarya in the Harshacharita of Bana, Tarapida in the Kad. does not have to undergo any such trials and tribulations. The motis of dream in the Tilakamanjari of Dhanapala has a parallel in the Kad.. Even so are there the parallel motifs of a birth of a son, the manner and reason for his nomenclature and education. While Pun- darika and Mahasveta in the Kad. fall in love at first sight the blossom of celestial Parijata tree, Samaraketu and Malayasundari in the Tilakamanjari of Dhanapala fall in love at first sight on seeing each other through the agency of divine music. In the Kad. Candrapida reaches the Acchoda lake while pursuing the Kinnera couple, Harivahana in the Tilakamanjari of Dhanapala is kidnapped by a flying elephant whom the prince pacified by the power of his musical skill. Though the parrots are found in both the works, the one in the Kad., viz., Vaisampayana,is cursed for his undue advances towards Mahasveta due to his infatuation for sensual pleasure, while Gandharvaka in the Tilakamanjari of Dhanapala is cursed for his unintentional fault of trying to cross over the Jain temple in a bid to save Malayasundari from the effect of poison, much in the same manner as does Kapinjala incur the curse of being on transformed into a horse when he tries to overtake a Vaimanika god. The love-letter in the Kad, serves to simply convey Pundarika's love-lorn condition to Mahasveta and nothing more%3B the numerous letters in the Tilakamanjari of Dhanapala are by no means loveletters all, some of them being friendly messages too, and

1028 all of them serve a definite poetic purpose of enhancing the suspense of the story. In the Kad., Keyuraka and Kapinjala are depicted as flying for the time being but there is no rational basis for their doing so, since their superhuman nature is not at all emphasized by Bana; in the Tilakamanjari of Dhanapala, however, the Vidyadhara Muni flies on the strength of his mystic Vidya, Gandharvaka does so in a celestial aeroplane or in the form of a parrot, and Citramaya assuming the form of an elephant flies due to his inherent superhuman powers as a Vidyadhara; so do the Vidyadharas accompanying their Emperor Vicitravirya as semi-divine beings. Moreover, many of the motifs of Bana's Harshacharita of Bana, too, are found to be skillfully terwoven in totally differen contexts in the Tilakamanjari of Dhanapala And, lastly there are a number of motifs in the Tilakamanjari of Dhanapala that have no parallel in the Kad., nor in the Harshacharita of Bana, as has been shown in detail in the ninth chapter. (iii) Plot-structure :BE inAs has been discussed in the ninth chapter, the plot of Dhanapala's Tilakamanjari of Dhanapala seems to resemble that of Bana's Kad. at first sight, excepting of course the Kathamukha portion of the latter. But there is a vital contrast between the two each in that the tales of Mahasveta, Jabali and the parrot/fully box the preceding ones, the scheme in the Tilakamanjari of Dhanapala is quite different. The tale of Samaraketu is not boxed in any other's,but

1029 on the contrary it boxes the one of Taraka. Again, the tale of Samaraketu at Kanci is boxed in that of Malayasundari and that of Malayasundari in that of Harivahana. Thus, the process of boxing the tales is partial in the Tilakamanjari of Dhanapala, while it is complete in the Kad.. And there is no para parallel in the Kad. for the change of n narrative view-point with regard to the complementary aspects of the same incident, e.g., the love at first sight of Samaraketu and Malayasundari and the consequences they face. Similarly, there is no parallel in the Kad. to the dramatic element of a tightly interwoven texture of the plot-structure of the Tilakamanjari of Dhanapala; the plot of the Kad. is rather loose and held together by the simple device of boxing of the mak" narratives. Nor do we find the sakkna sub-narratives in the Kad., like those of Taraka, Gandharvaka and Anangarati in the Tilakamanjari of Dhanapala which are boxed in their turn. It is not a shortcoming that Dhanapala has preferred to drop in the Tilakamanjari of Dhanapala La parallel to the Kathamukha portion of the Kad. inxix It is his realistic outlook that has inspired him to dispense with it in the process of shading the unnecessary addition of one more birth of the heroes. (iv) Suspense :Bana has relied upon long descriptions and the device of boxing the narratives in order to sustain the suspense, and has not resorted to the technique of dramatic

1030 irony or well-knit plot for the purpose as has been done by Dhanapala in his Tilakamanjari of Dhanapala Thus, there is a world of difference in the very technique, and Dhanapala far surpasses Bana whose technique looks but primary and row as compared to that of the former. And, the similarity in delineation of the poetic sentiments, can be found even in totally heterogenous works too, though Dhanapala differs from Bana in it. (v) Characters :Much has been made of the parallelisms between the characters of Bana's Kad. and those of Dhanapala's Tilakamanjari of Dhanapala, as also of some of the incidents connected with them in both. 23 They are equated in the following manner' both by Dr.Jagannath Pathak and Dr. Harindrabhushan Jain. In the Kad. Tarapida Vilasavati Candrapida Vaisampayana Keyuraka Kadambari Malayasundari In the Tilakamanjari of Dhanapala Meghavahana Madiravati Harivahana Samaraketu Gandharvaka Tilakamanjari Mak Mahasveta 2 Thus, King Tarapida of Ujjayini and Queen Madiravati are the similarly parents of the hero in the Kad.; Kind Meghavahana of Ayodhya and Queen Madiravati are the parents of the hero in 23. Magadham , Vol.I, No.2,p.86; Sagarika (A journal of Sagar University) , Vol.III, No.4, p.338; Samvid, Vol. IV, Nos.1-4,p.126. wang

1031 the Tilakamanjari of Dhanapala, and in both they get a son after considerable piety or penance. Again, just as Candrapida is a human hero and Kadambari is a Vidyadhara heroine of the main plot in the Kad., so is Harivahana a human hero and Tilakamanjari is a Vidyadhara heroine in the Tilakamanjari of Dhanapala But here the similarity ends. Now, while Harivahana in the Tilakamanjari of Dhanapala is deliberately kidnapped by Citramaya to the Vidyadhara region, Candrapida in the Kad. reaches there by mere aciident. Harivahana is a man of dignity and would not give in unless properly responded to; and Tilakamanjari is a girl having an inborn aversion for males due to her latent subconscious impressions of past birth. There is no such aspect attached to the hero and the heroine of the Kad.. AgainyakKINAN Again, Vaisampayana is said to be paralleled by Samaraketu. But Samaraketu is not the son of a minister as is Vaisampayana in the Kad., where both the heroes are friends right from their infancy. In the Tilakamanjari of Dhanapala the heroesm meet each as a result of s night-attack other by accident/and make friends by official appointment in a royal court by the father of the hero of the main plot, No such thing happens in the Kad.. Nor does Vaisampayana fall in love with his beloved in her corresponding next birth, as does Samaraketu with Malayasundari. The strange thing in the Kad. is that the heroines are never reborm and they endure in their same birth while the heroes go on migrating

1032 through a couple of births, viz., Candrapida and Pundarika Vaisampayana - Sudraka parrot, during the very life time of the heroines: There is no such overtaxing of imagination in the Tilakamanjari of Dhanapala Moreover, the heroines of the Kad., s are not so concrete as are those of the Tilakamanjari of Dhanapala, inspite of the apparent parallelisms. The heaped up epithets in the descriptions of Kadambari and Mahasveta do not add to the concretization of their characters in the Kad., as do various incidents in the Tilakamanjari of Dhanapala, viz., the aversion for males, the coquatish gestures at the temple, the search operation for Harivahana, her commanding nature, the letter of despair to Harivahana, and the attempt at suicide on the paty part of Tilakamanjari, and the strange device of throwing the garland, the attempts at suicide by hanging or eating poisonous fruit or drowning, and her life of consecutively befalling miseries in the case of Malayasundari. The lack of a parallel picture in the Tilakamanjari of Dhanapala to the one of an ugly old temple-priest (jarad-dravida-dharmika) of by Dr. Jagannath Pathak in the Kad. has been cited as a proof suffient to prove the limitations of Dhanapala in imitating Bana, concluding therefrom that Dhanapala imitates Bana only in those fields in which he is sufficiently equipped in point of poetic capa- 24 1 bility : But he then Bana would not be able to stand 24. Magadham , Vol.1, No. 2, p. 86 : tatraiva dhanapalo banamanukartum prayatate yatratmanamanukarana samartha manute |

1033 comparision to Dhanapala in the description of a Vetala or a double-meaning invocation to a boat :: On the other hand, Dr.Pathak is nearer the truth when he admits that the points of similarity are in fact the 25 traditional poetic conventions, that Danapala is no mere imitator of Bana, that Bana was the particular ideal for Dhanapala 27掳 26 (vi) Style and Diction :The ornate style of Sanskrit prose-romance had developed through centuries from the times of Patanjali. It was further perfected by Dandin a and Subandhu. But it was Bana who added to it the degree of richness, poetic sentiments, devices, figures of speech and elaboration of minute descriptions with heaped up epithets comprising too long compounds. But, it is an unquestionable fact that he was attracted by Subandhu's artificial ornamental style of representation and wonderful use of puns; and, being a genius, he could carefully keep clear of the pitfalls of Subandhu while using all his literary devices, mach>>nonas He was so much influenced by Subandhu that he incorporated in his works numerous sentences verbatim from the latter's VK.;B and many of the descriptions of the Kad. are 28 25. Magadham , Vol. I, No. 2, p. 85 : katicana kadambari katha gata khkhya stilaka - kathagata manjarya sadrsamtaya sampratiyante | 26. ibid. p. 87: param dhanapalo bapa manuka bananukarana matra miti naivasmakam paksah | 27. ibid.,p.89: mahakavirbana evam visisya dhanapala syadarsabhuta asid--- 1 28. Vasavadatta-katha, Introduction,pp.40-48. 鈥⑩��

1034 fashioned on those of Subandhu's VK, and there are numerous parallel's in thought, arrangement and general treatment between the Kad. and the VK. Inspite of all these, none of the veterans have called Bana an imitator of Subandhu! As has been aptly put by Dr. J.M.Shukla, it was a regular practice of Indian poets to lift an idea or an expression from an earlier writer, dress it in a different garb and try to demonstrate his superiority in skill.30 If, them, Dhanapala utilizes all these devices for his purpose in a appropriate places and proper occasions in the scheme of his quite independently well-knit plot-structure, how can one possibly brand him as an "imitator", and get away with it without being unreasonable or irrationally careless ? From the forty-four parallel passages cited by Prof. 31. Amaranath Pandey, it may be proved that Dhanapala had kept before his mind's eye the style of Bana, with a view to imms prove upon, and try to surpass, it while sailing safe of his worthy predecessor's flaws of too much fondness for incessant prose, too long descriptions comprising too long compounds, and too much proneness to pun. B When such a sensitive Sanskrit veteran rhetorician like Anandavardhana 32 would not brand such a tendency as "imitation", what locus standi do the modern critics of Dhanapala have to rush in to denegrate such a first-class Sanskrit poet and a versatile 29.Vasavadatta-katha,Introduction,p.45./30.ibid.,p.46./31.Banabhatta-ka Adana-pradana (Hindi),pp.63-71. 32. DHL, IV, 16: ya鈥�pi tadapi ramyam yamtra lokasya kincit, sphurati sphuritamida mitiya buddhirabhyujja hote | anugatamapi purvacchayaya vastu sataha ke tadrkum, sukavi- rupanibadhnannidyatam lopayati ||

NGHAnnadood 1035 Sanskrit novelist of Medieval India and consign him to a remote corner of the so-called "decadant" period of the history of Sanskrit literature and bewail that "the decline was serious n³? Although there was a latent competitive spirit in Dhanapala vis-a-vis Bana, he had great respect for the latter, whose wonderful poetic genius and wide-spread fame had been a powerful source for inspiration for him. His real intention, as has been discussed above in chapter nine, was to compose such a Sanskrit novel as would be based on a story that would conform to the tenets of Jainism, and at the same time, to offer a new model of Sanskrit 'Katha' which, while utilizing all the excellences and popular motifs of famous master-pieces like the Kad., the Harshacharita of Bana, the Samara., and the KUIM, and weaving them in appropriate, though quite different, contexts, would also mark a definite advance in the genre. Due to his overfondness for puns and recondite allusions, Bana is never satisfied unless he uses, practically at every step, double-meaning words and expressions; when he begins to give long chains of Slistopamas, where there is no resemblance between the Upamana and the Upameya except the Slista expression, one almost gets exasperated with him. 34 33. A New History of Sanskrit literature,p.396. / 34. Banabhatta, His life and Literature,p.102.

1036 Dhanapala's puns and allusions are never too long-drawn, nor exasperating, inspite of the fact that he has proved himself capable of composing more elaborate and longer descriptions consisting of longer single sentences, as compared to corresponding ones of Bana in similar situations; as for instance, the description of Ayodhya as compared to that of Ujjayini. When Bana gives a wealth of mythological, historical, geographical, philosophic, Sastric or literary allusions, one is bewildred by their brilliance, plenty and variety; he uses all the paths of Vakrokti of sound and sense in the 35 flow of his descriptions. Dhanapala is too conscious a literary artist to be left behind, or proved inferior to, Bana in all thses respects. And he has an additional advantage of utilizing Jain mythology over and above the Brahmanical one. He has got a matching resorcefulness in brilliantly marshalling his knowledge of the prevalent historical, philosophic, artistic and scientific lores in bringing out various facets of the picture of his character, and in depicting various details of the place sought to be described. But in the artistic exhibition of his brilliance and wealth of allusions and imageries he is never led astray from the meticulously maintained underlying order in the description. 35. Banabhatta, His life and Literature,p.102.

1037 Bana's flair for long compounds at times extending over more than one line, coupled with his propensity for puns, makes his works too mush ornate for the general audience even of the tenth century. Of course it is true that Bana's age was one of profound all-round scholarship; even then one cannot deny that "Bana uses his known gifts of imagination and word-painting like a prodigal spendthrift, using them at places without much propriety or proportion, only to display their riotous plenty. 鈥� 36 Dhanapala too is fond of displaying his craftsmanship in fresh imageries and exquisite word-pictures, but his sense of a novelist, of a skillful narrator, always mindful of sustaining the suspense in the story and interest in the audience, never allows himself to commit such excesses. When occasions demand, he too xi successfully brings into play his mastery of Sanskrit language and his power of aptly a arraying incessantly long-winded compounds, as for instance, in the description of equally thickly-grown and hazardous forest of Vindhya, or in that of the boundless expanse of roaring waves of an unfathomable ocean. Dhanapala never loses his sense of proportion or propriety. He generally prefers to use words of common occurance in their most familiar grammatical forms, so much so that one rarely comes across 36. Banabhatta, His life and Literature,p.103.

1038 forms in aorist or perfect or conditional. Unlike Bana, he does not seem to have been "inspired with an ambition of 37 And, if we having a separate dictionary composed for him". find a few of the rare Sanskrit or Prakrit words in the Tilakamanjari of Dhanapala, they were certainly not rare in the days of Dhanapala, who, on the contrary, preferred them to more sophisticated Sanskrit ones with the sole intention of making himself easily intelligible so that the interest and joy in the story and narrative art was not impeded by distraction in the form of an out-of-the-way word. "Bana's eye, in a fine frenzy rolling, moves from hea-.. ven to earth and it appears as if there is nothing under the 38 Sun that he will not imagine". Dhanapala too has been guilty of this same weakness, though in a lesser degree. His imageries are more bound to earth when he deals with earthly subjects. But, when the subject rises from the surface of the earth, his imagination too grows finer and ethereal. His description of Malayasundari as a beautiful Vidyadhara maiden as seen by youthfully passionate Samaraketu in contrast to that of her as 陇陇oby an ascetic girl as seen by placidly cultivated Harivahana amply testifies to this quality of in Dhanapala. His description of Nature is markedly/sympathetic harmony with the prevalent situation or mood in the context. 38. B Banabhatta, His life and Literature,p.104.

1039 If Bana is marvellous in his descriptive power and in masterly monologues like Sukanasa's advice to Candrapida or the latter's consolation of Mahasveta, Dhanapala is uniquely fascinating in highly picturesque depiction of village life, and a experiences of a dying girl hanging from a k noose, 鉁� beinni bewildered loving friend frantically striving to save her from the very noose. If Bana's humour finds vent in his description of old ugly priest, Dhanapala's sense of humour finds still better expression in most approprietely designed diningno dialogue of King Meghavahana with the Vetala and with the Goddess Sri. u Dhanapala, unlike Bana, does not prefer lawless splendour to decent insipidity, and he is free from Bana's relish in the extended and over-ostentations method which is a hindrance not only to the vigorous narrative, but also to the reality of sentiment and character. Dhanapala's personages are not shadowy%3B the world he depicts is removed in time and character, but not in appreciation and sympathy, from our own. Unlike Bana's heroes etc., Dhanapala's heroes, kings and heroines are compact characters; they are not far removed from human beings. At the same time, it must be admitted that Dhanapala did not possess that wonderful insight into the currents of youthful passion and virgin modesty, in their varying impulses of joy and grief, hope and despair, which Bana did.

# 1040 It was in this respect that Dhanapala could not excel Bana. The chief value of Bana's unique romances lies in their sentiment and poetry, while that of Dhanapala lies in its narrative, its characterization, its presentation, its devotional fervour and its subtle undercurrent of the moral theme. Both have tried the extravagance of luxuriant diction as a vehicle of their extravagantly romantic tales of love and despair. 0 * * 000 0 000 *