North Indian Inscriptions

LITERARY HISTORY

manner. There are, no doubt, some thoughts similar to both, but there is nothing in his argument to show clearly that Vatsabhaṭṭi was indebted to Mayūra, or Mayūra to Vatsabhaṭṭi. It is true that according to stanza 81 of the Mayūra-śataka, prayers are offered to the Sun in the morning, as Bühler has pointed out, by the Siddhas, gods, Chāraṇas, Gandharvas, Nāgas, Yātudhānas, Sādhyas, Mun-īndras (chiefs of sages), and Mōkshins (seekers of emancipation),¹ and that according to verse 1 of the praśasti the same prayers are offered to the same god by such classes of beings as gods, Siddhas, Yōgins (desirous of emancipation), and Munis (sages). In the former the number of the divine and semi-divine beings that adore the Sun is much larger than those mentioned in the latter. Besides, the way in which the former adore the god is different from that done by the later. There is thus a vague similarity of thought, but there is nothing to show convincingly that Vatsabhaṭṭi influenced Mayūra or Mayūra, Vatsabhaṭṭi. Similarly Bühler draws our attention to verse 13 which may be translated as follows: “which (town), being enclosed by two charming rivers of tremulous waves, shines like the body of the God of Love, clasped in private by (his wives) Prīti and Rati, possessed of (prominent) breasts.” The idea of a river, looked upon as a female, is a natural one and is frequently met with in Sanskrit poetry. Bühler cites two illustrations in support of it. The first is from Subandhu’s Vāsavadattā, which says of the Vindhya mountain: Rēvayā priyatamay=ēva prasārita-vīchi-hastay=ōpagūḍhaḥ,² “Encircled by the Rēvā (Narmadā) as by a beloved with extending arms, namely, (extending)waves.” The second citation is from the Bṛihatsaṁhitā (XII, 6), namely, rahasi madana-saktayā Rēvayā kāntay=ēv=ōpagūḍhaṁ, “Encircled by the Rēvā as by a love-sick beloved in private.” The latter of these quotations, of course, affords a more exact parallel to verse 13 of our inscription, because both contain the word rahasi and also because the former, containing, as it does, the phrase prasārita-vīchi-hastayā, represents a further development of the original thought. Sabandhu is, of course, later than Varāhamihira. But whether Vatsabhaṭṭi preceded Varāhamihira or Varāhamihira, Vatsabhaṭṭi, or whether they were contemporaries of each other, it is very difficult to say. Bühler, however, is right in remarking that “even though it may not be certain that Vatsabhaṭṭi lived before Varāhamihira, one would be tempted to conjecture a close connection between his verse and that of the Bṛihatsaṁhitā.” “The real fact seems to be,” he proceeds further, “that all the three poets imitated some well-known model.” Although this point cannot be properly decided, the thing is quite different in regard to verses 10 and 11, which may be rendered as follows:

...........(verse 10) “Where the buildings, with moving flags, full of women, ...........intensely white,
...........(and) extremely lofty, bear resemblance to the peaks of white
...........clouds variegated with forked lightning”;
...........(verse 11) “And (where) other (buildings) resemble the lofty
...........summits of Kailāsa, with long terraces and rail mouldings, resounding with the notes of
...........music, with works in painting set up, and adorned with waving plantain trees”;

        We shall do well to compare these verses with the stanza occurring in the Meghaduta
___________________________________________________________

¹ The stanza in question is as follows:
......Siddhaiḥ siddhānta-miśraṁ śrita-vidhi vibudhaiś =chāraṇaiś=chāṭugarbhaṁ
......gītyā gāndharva-mukhyair=muhur=ahipatibhir=yātudhānair=yatātmā /
......sārghaṁ sādhyair =munīndrair =muditatama-manō-mōkshibhiḥ pakshapātāt
......prātaḥ prārabhyamāṇa-stutir=avatu ravir =viśva-vandy-ōdayō vaḥ //
² Vāsavadattā (Bibliotheca Indica edn.), p. 102, lines 1-2 (Vani Vilas Press, Srirangam, 1906 edn., p. 114, lines 1-2).