Chapter 1 - Somadeva and his Age

Two works of Somadeva are extant: Yasastilaka and Nitivakyamrta. The former, called also Yasodhara-maharaja-carita, deals with the pathetic story of Prince Yasodhara in prose and verse in eight Books called Asvasas. The latter work is a treatise on polity, divided into thirty-two chapters consisting of aphorisms on the various topics dealt with. Nitivakyamrta seems to have been written after Yasastilaka. Somadeva gives a fair amount of information about himself at the end of his Yasastilaka. He belonged to an order of Jaina monks known as Devasamgha, and was the disciple of Nemideva who was the disciple of Yasodeva.³ The colophon to Nitivakyamrta tells us that Somadeva was the younger brother of Mahendradeva, and had the following honorific titles: Syadvadacalasimha 'A lion on the mountain of Syadvada', Tarkika-cakravartin The Lord of the logicians', Vadibha-pancanana 'A lion to the elephants, to wit, the disputants', Vakkallola-payonidhi An ocean of the waves of eloquence', and Kavikularaja 'The king of the poets'. We are also told that Somadeva was the author of Yasodhara-maharaja-carita, SannavatiThere is prakarana, Mahendra-matali-samjalpa and Yukticintamanisutra. some doubt about the title of the last work, as a manuscript of Nitivakyamrta written in Samvat 1290, and preserved in one of the Jaina Bhandars at Pattan, gives it as Yukticintamanistavat. In one of the concluding verses of Yasastilaka Somadeva tells us that the work was copied by a celebrated scribe named Racchuka, who was called Lekhaka-sikhamani, and whose calligraphy seems to have been utilized by the fair sex for their love-letters. All trace of this first copy of the original manuscript seems to have been lost. 1 Kavyamala 70, Parts I & II, Bombay 1901. 2 Manikachandra D. Jaina Granthamala 22, Bombay 1922. 3 srimanasti sa devasamghatilako devo yasahpurvakah, sisyastasya babhuva sadgunanidhih srinemidevahvayah | tasyascaryatapah sthitekhi navaterjeturmahavadinam, sisyo'bhudiha somadeva iti yastasyaisa kavyakramah || Yasastilaka, part II, p. 418. 4 Descriptive Catalogue of Manuscripts in the Jain Bhandars at Pattan, Vol. I, p. 31. 5 vidyavinodavanavasitahrcchukena, pustam vyalekhi vilasallipi racchukena | srisomadevaracitasya yasodharasya, sallokamanya- gunaratnamahidharasya || api ca | yasyaksaravaliradhiravilocanabhirakanksayate madanasasanalekhanesu | tasmai vivekisu na yacchati racchukaya, ko nama lekhakasikhamaninamadheyam || .

Somadeva goes on to say that the Kavya, that is, Yasastilaka was composed in Saka 881 (959 A. D.), the cyclic year being Siddhartha, on the Madana-trayodasi day of the month of Caitra, when Krsnarajadeva was extending his sway at Melpati, after having vanquished the Pandya, Cola, Cerama (i. e. Cera), Ceylonese and other kings.' Somadeva's statement is remarkable for its historical accuracy, as it is corroborated by the Karhad plates of the great Rastrakuta emperor Krsna III, issued on the 9 th March, 959 A. D., at Melpati, a few weeks earlier than the completion of Somadeva's Yasastilaka. The subject of the inscription is the grant of a village in Karahata (Karhad in Satara district) to a Saiva ascetic, but the record was issued at Melpati (Melpadi in North Arcot district), where the emperor was encamped with his victorious army 'for establishing his followers in the southern provinces, for taking possession of the estates of the provincial chiefs and for constructing certain temples'. The inscription, like Somadeva, refers to Krsna III's victories over the Colas and the kings of the Ceranma (i. e. Cera), Pandya and other countries as well as Ceylon, and tells us, besides, that he erected a pillar of victory at Ramesvara.* The emperor states in the record that he issues the order, 'having established his victorious camp at Melpati' (melpati-samavasita-srimadvijaya-katakena maya). 3 The victory over the Colas was the most important, as Krsna III is known to have occupied Tondaimandalam (to the north of the Kaveri), and appears to have annexed the northern part of the Cola dominions to his empire, sometime after the decisive battle of Takkolam in 949 A. D., when the Cola crown-prince Rajaditya, the son of Parantaka I, was killed on the battlefield by Krsna's tributary and ally, the Ganga ruler Butuga II." The Kaihad grant of 959 A. D. shows the Rastrakuta emperor in his camp at Melpati at the close of his victorious southern campaigns. As a recent authority on Cola history says, "there can be no question that the effect on the Cola empire was ruinous, and that as a consequence of the blow in 1 'sakanrpakalatita samvatsarasatesvastasvekasityadhikesu gatesu (ankatah 881 ) siddharthasamvatsarantargata caitrama samadanatrayo- dasyam "melpa tipravardhamana rajyaprabhave srikrsnarajadeve sati | . 2 Epigraphia Indica, Vol. IV, parts VI and VII. "The date of the grant was Wednesday, the thirteenth tithi of the dark fortnight of Phalguna of the cyclic year Kalayukta, the Saka year being 880 past (1. 56 f.)." 3 Ibid., p. 281. 4 Somadeva says: pandyasimhala colaceramaprabhrtin mahipatin prasadhya . The inscription says: krtva ' daksinadigjayodyatadhiya caulanvayonmulanam, tadbhumim nijabhrtyavargaparitasceranmapandyadikan | yenoccaih saha simhalena karadan sanmandaladhisvaran nyastah kirtilatamkuraprati krtistambhasca ramesvare || . 5 Altekar: The Rastrakutas and their times, p. 117 ff., Poona 1934.

the north, much of the south also slipped out of Parantaka's hands. The Cola empire was no more; it had to be built up all over again"." It is interesting to note that the Melpati camp of Krsna III is mentioned also by Puspadanta in his Mahapurana, a voluminous work in Apabhramsa verse on the lives of the sixty-three heroes (salaka-purusas) of the Jaina faith, commenced in 959 A. D., that is, in the year of the completion of Somadeva's Yasastilaka, and finished in 965 A. D. Puspadanta says in his Mahapurana 1. 3- tam kahami puranu pasiddhanamu ubbaddhajuda bhubhamgamisu siddhatyavarisi bhuvanahiramu | todepanu codaho tanau sisu | jahim bhacchai tudigu mahanubhau | mahi paribhamamtu mepaniyaru | bhuvanekaramu rayahirau tam dinadinnadhanakanayapayaru Puspadanta means to say that he commenced his Purana in the cyclic year Siddhartha (the same as that mentioned by Somadeva) when the lord of kings', Tudiga, explained in the gloss as Krsnaraja, was in the city of Mepadi, identified in the gloss with Melapatiya-nagara, that is, Melpati, after having severed the Cola prince's head with the hair tied up'. This is obviously a reference to Rajaditya's death in the battle of Takkolam, the memory of which was still fresh in 959. Puspadanta describes the town of Melpati as 'rolling in festivities', and as a place where presents of money and gold had been given to the poor. It is natural to surmise that Krsna III was celebrating his southern victories at Melpati that year, and the town was in a gay mood on account of the celebrations. The year 959 A. D. was indubitably a year of political and cultural importance in the history of the Dekkan, as it not only saw the consummation of Rastrakuta hegemony in the south , but the commencement and completion respectively of two monumental works of Indian literature. Although Somadeva was a contemporary of Krsna III, his work was not composed at Manyakheta, the Rastrakuta capital, but at an obscure place called Gangadhara, which seems to have been the capital of a prince named Vagaraja, the eldest son of a Calukya chief named Arikesarin, a tributary of Krsnaraja. The Arikesarin mentioned by Somadeva belonged to an obscure 1 Nilakanta Sastri: The Colas, Vol. I, p. 162. 2 Vaidya: Introduction to Jasaharacariu, p. 20, Poona 1931. 3 ... srikrsnarajadeve sati tatpadapadmopajivinah calukya kulajanmanah samantacudamaneh srimadarikesarinah prathamaputrasya srimadvagarajapravardhamanavasudharayam gangadharayam vinirmapitamidam kavyamiti | Yasastilaka, Book VIII, part II, p. 419. Ms. A reads . This is omitted altogether in Mss. B and C. Ms. B, however, reads agai, and in Ms. C agur seems to be corrooted into basudharayam .

branch of the Calukya dynasty, which ruled over a province called Jola, a portion of which is said to have been included in the modern district of Dharwar in Bombay Presidency.¹ Nothing is known about Gangadhara, but it seems to have been somewhere in or around Dharwar District. It may perhaps be identified with Gangawati in the south-western corner of Hyderabad State in Raichur District, quite near Dharwar. There is also a river named Gangawali in the North Kanara District south-west of Dharwar." As regards the prince during whose reign Somadeva composed his romance, there is some doubt about the reading of the name Vagaraja found in the printed text of Yasastilaka. Of the manuscripts of the work used by me, the well-written and correct A reads Vagaraja as in the printed edition, but Mss. B and C read Vadyaraja, while a manuscript consulted by Pt. Nathuram Premi reads Vadyagaraja.³ The correct name, as we shall see, seems to be Baddiga of which Vadyaraja and Vadyagaraja are Sanskritized variations. A copper plate inscription in Sanskrit recently found at Parbhani in Hyderabad State not only gives us a glimpse of Somadeva seven years after the composition of Yasastilaka but furnishes a genealogy of the feudatory Calukya chiefs in whose territory he lived and worked. The genealogy of these tributaries of the Rastrakutas, hitherto known to us from the Kanarese Bharata composed by the Jaina poet Pampa in 941 A. D., is here carried to 966 A. D., the date of the inscription. The list of kings may be compiled as follows: Yuddhamalla I, Arikesarin I, Narasimha I (+Bhadradeva), Yuddhamalla II, Baddiga I (defeated and captured Bhima), Yuddhamalla III, Narasimha II, Arikesarin II (married a Rastrakuta princess named Lokambika), Bhadradeva, Arikesarin III, Baddiga II (Vadyaga) and Arikesarin IV. Of the kings mentioned Arikesarin II was the patron of Pampa who wrote his masterpieces in 941 A. D.; while Baddiga II or Vadyaga was the king during whose reign Somadeva completed his romance in the year 959 A. D., as recorded in the colophon. The inscription under discussion 1 Bhandarkar: Early History of the Dekkan, third edition, p. 137. 2 The Imperial Gazetteer of India, Vol. XXVI, Atlas, Plates 39 and 42. 3 Pt. Premi: Jaina Sahitya aura Itihasa p. 76, Bombay 1942. 4 Reproduced in the above work (p. 90 ff.) from the Journal of the Bharata Itihasa Samsodhana Mandala, Poona, Vol. XIII, No. 3, published in Marathi. 5 Bhandarkar: Early History of the Dekkan, p. 137 and Altekar: The Rastrakutas and their times, p. 129.

records the grant of a village to Somadeva by Vadyaga's son Arikesarin IV in Saka 888 or 966 A. D. for the repairs and upkeep of a Jaina temple called Subhadhama-jinalaya, built by Vadyaga in the capital (Lem )bulapataka. The name of the village granted to Somadeva was Vanikatupulu." It is clear from the above record that in 966 A, D. Somadeva was in charge of the Subhadhama temple, and seems to have carried on his literary activities undisturbed, as a hitherto unknown work Syadvadopunisad is here attributed to him in addition to Yasodharacarita.2 He was held in the highest esteem by his contemporaries, and kings and feudatory chiefs are described as reverently bowing at his feet. It may be noted in this connection that there are at least two puzzling factors in the inscription we are considering. Firstly, the Samgha to which Somadeva belonged is here called Gaudasamgha: Yasodeva, the guru of Somadeva's guru Nemideva, is assigned to this Samgha. But, as we have seen, Somadeva himself describes Yasodeva as belonging to the Devasamgha. Secondly, the capital of Arikesarin IV is stated to be (Lem)bulapataka, about which nothing definite is known, although it might be somewhere in Hyderabad State. It is noteworthy that we have so far the names of three capitals of the Calukya chiefs who ruled in the Jola territory. Arikesarin II, who was the patron of the famous Kannada poet Pampa, ruled at Puligere (mod. Lakshmesvar in Dharwar District); Vadyaga is described by Somadeva as ruling at Gangadhara; and his son Arikesarin IV calls (Lem )bulapataka his capital. It may also be noted that just as Arikesarin, the father of Vadyaga, is described by Somadeva as a humble tributary of Krsnaraja (Krsna III), similarly the present inscription describes Arikesarin, the son of Vadyaga, as a tributary of the same overlord in exactly similar terms. While Somadeva was a contemporary of Krsna III and Vadyaga, it is not clear whether either of them was his patron; probably he had no 1 2 *** ' ( lem ) bulapatakanamadheya nijarajadhanyam nijapituh srimadvadyagasya subhadhamajinalayakhyavasa (teh ) khandasphutitanavasudha- karmabalinivedyarthe sakabdesvastasityadhikesvastasatesu gatesu tena srimadarikesarina srimatsomadeva suraye ...."vani- katupulunama gramah dattah || ' ' viracayita yasodharacaritasya kartta syadvadopanisadah kavi (vayi )ta canyesamapi subhasitanam ...... 3 'akhilamahasama (ntasi ) mantaprantaparyastottamsasrak surabhicaranah sakalavidvajjanakarnavatamsibhavadyasah pundarikah surya iva sakalavanibhrtam sirahsrenisu sikhandamandanayamanapadapadmo'bhut | ', 4 Pt. Premi (op. cit.) is inclined to identify this Gauda with the Gola or Golla kingdom of the South, mentioned in the Sravana Belgola Inscriptions. 5 Rice: Kanarese Literature, p. 30. 6 'svastyakalavarsadevasriprthivivallabha maharajadhirajaparamesvara paramabhattaraka srimada moghavarsadevapadanudhyatapravarddhamana vijayarajya srikrsnarajadevapadapatropajivina | .

patron properly so called. Somadeva was a Jaina Acarya and respectfully mentions his guru. He was, besides, a political thinker, and in his Nitivakyamrta pays homage to the state and not to any king. It is, however, certain that he was intimately acquainted with court life, and may have passed some time in the Rastrakuta capital. The court life so minutely described by him in Book III of his Yasastilaka does not apply to a petty feudatory chief like that of Gangadhara, and can be true only of a sovereign of imperial status, who receives embassies from foreign courts, declares war against refractory kings, and has at his disposal regiments drawn from different parts of Hindustan. Somadeva, the author of Nitivakyamrta, was a patriotic citizen of the Rastrakuta empire, and gave much thought to the principles of state-craft and the well-being of the state, and in his great romance he gives a picture of the imperial court, besides throwing sidelights on the problems of government affecting war and peace. The tenth century, like its predecessor, was a flourishing period of Jaina literature in Sanskrit and Prakrit, and in Kanarese as well. Confining ourselves to the epoch of Somadeva, we may safely assume it to coincide with the reign of Krsna III from 939 to 968 A. D., and within these limits we come across several distinguished names in the annals of scholarship and literature. In 941 the famous Kanarese poet Pampa wrote his two poems, Adipurana, which relates the history of the first Tirthamkara, and Vikramarjuna-vijaya, which tells the story of the Mahabharata, or rather that of Arjuna. About the year 950 Ponna, the second great Kanarese poet of the century, wrote his S'antipurana, which relates the legendary history of the sixteenth Tirthamkara, under the patronage of Krsna III who gave the poet the honorific title of Ubhaya-kavi-cakravartin for his proficiency in Kanarese and Sanskrit.* Quite at the beginning of the reign of Krsna III, Indranandin wrote in Sanskrit a work called Jvalamalini-kalpa dealing with a mystic fire-cult associated with the goddess Jvalamalini. The work was composed in 939 A. D. at Manyakheta and refers to Krsnaraja." Among the immediate contemporaries of Somadeva we come across two distinguished names: Puspadanta and Munjarya Vadighanghala Bhatta. We have already referred to the former, who commenced his Mahapurana in 959 A. D. under the patronage of Krsna III's minister Bharata, and wrote two other works, Jasaharacariu, which, like Somadeva's Yasastilaka, relates 1 'atha dharmarthakamaphalaya rajyaya namah | ' 2 See below Chapters IV and V. 3 Rice: Kanarese Literature. 4 Hiralal: Catalogue of Sanskrit and Prakrit Manuscripte in C. P. and Berar, p. XXX.

the story of Yasodhara, and Nayakumaracariu or the story of Nagakumara, both under the patronage of Bharata's son and successor Nanna. Puspadanta wrote in Apabhrammsa verse, and is one of the most important Jaina poets in that language so far discovered; and his prodigious literary activity bears witness to the flourishing condition of Apabhramsa literature in the tenth century. Harisena' who wrote his Dharmapariksa in Apabhramsa in 988 A. D. mentions three distinguished Apabhramsa poets: Puspadanta, Svayambhu and Caturmukha; and Puspadanta himself refers to Svayambhu and Caturmukha in his Mahapurana 1.9.3 The works of SvayambhuPaumacariu and Ritthanemicariu-are available in manuscript, and his son Tribhuvana Svayambhu was also a poet and made substantial additions to his father's poems.* Svayambhu may be assigned to the eighth or ninth century, as he mentions Ravisena, the author of Padmacarita (seventh century), in his Paumacariu, and is himself mentioned by Puspadanta. Caturmukha is earlier than Svayambhu, as the latter mentions him in his Ritthanemicariu and other works. It is also noteworthy that a number of other Apabhrammsa poets is cited by Svayambhu in another work of his, a treatise on Prosody called Svayambhu-chanda. There was thus a welldefined literary tradition in Apabhramsa in and before Somadeva's time; and there is no doubt that he was to some extent influenced by the prevailing current of Apabhramsa poetry, as he has used various Apabhramsa metres with considerable skill in a number of verses of his Yasastilaka. The use of Apabhramsa metres in Sanskrit verse is a novel experiment on the part of a writer who sets out to write classical Sanskrit in the style of Subandhu and Bana, but it shows the wide range of Somadeva's literary equipment and his interest in the vernacular literature of the time. Further, in spite of the divergent character of the works of Somadeva and Puspadanta, they seem to have occasionally drawn on common sources for some at least of the literary material handled by them. The story of Yasodhara itself is one such example; while the tale of Jamadagni and the two birds, and that of Sribhuti and Bhadramitra related by Somadeva as independent stories in Yasastilaka, Books VI and VII, occur in Puspadanta's Mahapurana (LXV. 13 ff. and LVII. 7 ff.) as part of a larger scheme of Jaina religious and mythological stories. 1 For details see the Introductions to the critical editions of these works. The first two are edited by Dr. Vaidya and the third by Prof. Jain. 2 Annals of the B. O. R. I., XXIII, 592-608; Pt. Premi's Jaina Sahitya aura Itihasa, p. 326. 3 caumudu sayambhu siriharisu donu naloida kara isanu banu | 4 See Pt. Premi's article on Svayambhu in his Jaina Sahitya aura Itihasa. 5 See below Chapter VII. 6 See below Chapter XVI.

00 8 YASASTILAKA AND INDIAN CULTURE Munjaryya Vadighanghala Bhatta is known to us from the Kudlur plates of the Ganga king Marasimha, dated 963 A. D.¹ Marasimha was a tributary of Krsna III, and the grant of a village to Vadighanghala Bhatta by the former forms the subject of the inscription, which eloquently describes the great Jaina teacher's attainments and influence. Vadighanghala Bhatta was a distinguished grammarian and seems to have propounded a system of grammar on a sure and sound basis." He was an expert in Lokayata, Samkhya and Buddhist philosophy as well as Vedic interpretation,³ a great master of Jaina doctrine, and an eminent poet. He was intimately connected with the Ganga king Butuga II and Krsna III and the Rastrakuta capital. We are told that his faultless and eloquent elucidation of literature (sahityavidya) made Ganga-Gangeya (Butuga II), 'a cuckoo in the pleasure-garden of learning', his pupil. He was honoured by the learned men of Vallabharaja's capital, who were enlightened by his exposition of all branches of political science, and Vallabharaja seems to be no other than Krsna III who is called Vallabhanarendradeva in the Karhad grant, and Vallabhanarendra and Vallabharaya in Puspadanta's works. Krsna is, moreover, explicitly mentioned in the inscription, which declares that Krsnarajadeva, who with his tributaries honoured the master, conquered the regions by acting upon his counsel, which was 'sound in relation to the present as well as the future'." It would thus appear that while Somadeva was preoccupied with the theoretical principles of state-craft, Vadighanghala Bhatta played the role of a practical statesman and acted as a political adviser to the Rastrakuta emperor. The glory and achievements of the empire seem to have opened new vistas before the thinking men of the age, and persons like Somadeva and Vadighanghala Bhatta, who in other times would probably have confined themselves to literature or speculative thought, took a deep interest in matters of vital importance to the state. The disruption of the Rastrakuta empire after Krsna III must have been a rude shock to cultural possibilities in the Dekkan. Text and translation in Annual Report of the Mysore Archaeological Department for 1921. 2 'nihsamsaya nirvivada vyutpaditavyakaranaprakarah ' lines 159, 160. 3 'vedarthavicaracarudhisanah ' line 162. 4 'yasya niravadyasahityavidyavyakhyananipunadhisananugunavanivisesatisaya cchatribhutasakala vidya vinodaramakalakanthaganga- gangeyabhupasya, sakalarajavidyapratipadana pratibuddhabodhaprabodhitavallabharajakatakanekavidvajjanopajanitapujaprakatikrtamahimo- mnatimahaniya vidyavibhavasya ', lines 165-169. 5 RHERIG Jasaharacariu 1. 1. 3; qayakumaracariu 1. 3. 2. 6 tadatvaya tisughata mantrakramopadesanusthana vasikrtakhiladiganganasarabhasasambhogasukhasampannakrsnarajadeva vihitavacanasambhavanapra- bhavopanatasakalamandalikasamanta samtatiprasarasya ', lines 169-171.

Two important Jaina poets Vadiraja and Vadibhasimha are said to be Somadeva's disciples. Srutasagara in his commentary on Yasastilaka 2. 126 quotes a statement which represents Somadeva as saying that both Vadiraja and Vadibhasimha are his disciples." The statement cannot, however, be traced in the two extant works of Somadeva, and neither Vadiraja nor Vadibhasimha claims Somadeva as his guru in any of their works. Vadiraja says at the end of his Parsvanathacarita, a poem in 12 cantos, that his guru is Matisagara; besides, he belonged to the Nandisamgha, while Somadeva belonged to the Devasamgha. Similarly, Vadibhasimha in his prose romance Gadyacintamani 1.6 gives expression to his deep obligations to his guru Puspasena. On the other hand, it is not chronologically impossible for Vadiraja and Vadibhasimha to be regarded as disciples of Somadeva. Vadiraja, according to his own statement, wrote his Parsvanathacarita in Saka 947 (1025 A. D.) during the reign of the Western Calukya king Jayasimha II who ruled from 1015 to 1042 A. D. As regards Vadibhasimha, he as well as Vadiraja is mentioned in the Belgamve grant of Jayasimha II, dated 1036 A. D., which describes a Saiva savant named Vadi-Rudraguna as having defeated in argument Vadibhasimha, Vadiraja and other scholars; and the great king Rajaraja mentioned at the end of Vadibhasimha's poem Ksatracudamanis might very well refer to the Cola king Rajaraja the Great who ruled from 985 to 1014 A. D. It will be thus seen that Vadiraja and Vadibhasimha flourished in the first quarter of the eleventh century; and assuming Srutasagara's statement to be correct and genuine, they may be regarded as having been Somadeva's disciples during their boyhood. But, nevertheless, it is strange that they should be so completely silent about their early guru Somadeva. The epoch of Somadeva was preceded and followed by a considerable output of Jaina literature in various parts of India. Among his predecessors, from the beginning of the ninth century to the early part of the tenth, we find such names as Virasena (author of the Dhavala commentary and part of the Jayadhavala), Jinasena (completed the Jayadhavala and wrote Adipurana and other works), Gunabhadra (author of Uttarapurana and Atmanusasana), the Jaina Sakatayana, Vidyananda (author of Astasahasri, Tattvarthaslokavartika etc.), Siddharsi (author of Upamitibhavaprapanca katha), and Harisena (author of Kathakosa) and others; while among his immediate successors, from about the last quarter of the tenth century to the first quarter of the eleventh, we find Kanarese writers like Camunda- 1 sa vadirajo'pi sri somadevacaryasya sisyah | 'vadibha simho'pi madiyasisyah srivadirajo'pi madiya sisyah ' ityuktatvacca | 2 See below Chapter XIII. 3 rajatam rajarajo'yam rajarajo mahodayaih | tejasa vayasa surah ksatracudamanirgunaih || . 2

raya (wrote in prose Camundaraya-purana), Ranna (wrote Ajitapurana and Gadayuddha), and Nagavarma (author of the Kanarese version of Bana's Kadambari); philosophical writers like Nemicandra Siddhantacakravartin (wrote in Prakrit Gommatasara, Dravyasamgraha and other works) and Prabhacandra (author of Nyayakumudacandra and Prameyakamalamartanda'); and poets and scholars like Vadiraja (wrote Parsvanathacarita, Kakutsthacarita and Yasodharacarita), Vadibhasimha (wrote Gadyacintamani and Ksatracudamani), Dhanapala (author of Tilakamanjari), Amitagati (author of Subhasitaratnasamdoha, Dharmapariksa and other works), Asaga (author of Vardhamanacarita), Mahasena (author of Pradyumnacarita), Viranandin (author of Candraprabhacarita), and perhaps Kanakamara (wrote Karakandacariu in Apabhramsa); and other writers like the grammarian Dayapala (author of Rupasiddhi and contemporary of Vadiraja). While Somadeva made substantial contributions to Jaina religious literature, his literary. importance and achievement go beyond its narrow limits; and the value of his work can be assessed in relation to Sanskrit literature as a whole. He is one of the most versatile talents in the history of Indian literature, and his masterpiece Yasastilaka reveals the manifold aspects of his genius. He is a master of prose and verse, a profound scholar with a well-stocked memory, an authority on Jaina dogma, and a critic of contemporary philosophical systems. He is a close student of the art of government, and in this respect his Yasastilaka and Nitivakyamrta supplement each other. He is a redactor of ancient folktales and religious stories, and at times shows himself an adept in dramatic dialogue. Last but not least, he is a keen observer of men and manners. The position of Somadeva is, indeed, unique in Sanskrit literature. Despite the fact that Somadeva's reputation rests on a prose romance and a treatise on polity, he was primarily a Jaina theologian; and nearly half of Yasastilaka and presumably the lost works are devoted to the defence and exposition of the tenets of the Jaina faith. He acknowledges the fact himself and would have us believe that his poetry was a byproduct of his philosophical studies. He tells us in one of the opening verses of Yasastilaka that just as a cow yields milk by eating grass, similarly his intellect produced the beautiful utterances of his poetical composition by feeding on the dry logical studies, to which he had devoted himself since his childhood." Tarka or philosophical argumentation was Somadeva's true vocation, and his honorific titles Tarkikacakravartin and Vadibhapancanana point to the fact that he, like many intellectuals of his age, spent a good 1 See Introduction (in Hindi) to Nyayakumudacandra, p. 121, Bombay 1938. 2 ajanmasamabhyastacchuska tarka trnadiva mamasyah | matisuramerabhavadidam suktipayah sukrtinam punyaih || .

deal of his energy in engaging in controversy influential disputants belonging to rival faiths. This was, in fact, a trait of the times, as can be seen from such peculiar but significant names as Vadiraja, Vadibhasimha, Vadigharatta, Vadighanghala, Paravadimalla, Vadikolahala etc., found among the Jaina writers and scholars of the age. That this was a practice common to all the schools is evident from I-tsing's eloquent description of it in his account of education in India towards the end of the seventh century. "When they are refuting heretic doctrines", says the Chinese traveller, "all their opponents become tongue-tied and acknowledge themselves undone. Then the sound of their fame makes the five mountains (of India) vibrate, and their renown flows, as it were, over the four borders." "They oppose the heretics as they would drive beasts (deer) in the middle of a plain, and explain away disputations as boiling water melts frost. In this manner they become famous throughout Jambudvipa (India), receive respect above gods and men, and serving under the Buddha and promoting His doctrine, they lead all the people (to Nirvana)."1 The Prasasti verses of Nitivakyamrta emphasize Somadeva's activity as a controversialist, and proclaim his superiority to all prospective disputants. One of the verses, for instance, asks a disputant how he dares argue with Somadeva, not being an Akalanka in argumentation nor a Hamsasiddhantadeva in the knowledge of traditional lore nor a Pujyapada in eloquence. sakalasamayatarphe nakalanko'si vadi na bhavasi samayoktau hamsasiddhantadevah | na ca vacanavilase pujyapado'si tattvam vadasi kathamidanim somadevena sardham || The final verse trumpets Somadeva's eloquence which strikes terror into the hearts of all disputants, and claims that even Brhaspati cannot hold his own in argument with him." While these boasts and eulogies are of a conventional character, they reveal one aspect of Somadeva's intellectual equipment; and he was perhaps as assiduous in his polemical activity as any of his contemporaries. This, however, should not blind us to the fact that poetry and literature must have made heavy claims on his time and intellectual effort, as the composition of an extensive work like Yasastilaka in prose and verse was bound to presuppose long and careful preparation, involving laborious study of the secular branches of study and fervent devotion to the art of poetry . His statement that he had studied Tarka since his childhood shows that he began his career as a student of logic, metaphysics and allied subjects, 1 A Record of the Buddhist Religion by I-Tsing. Trans. by Takakusu, pp. 178, 181. 2 darpandhabodhabudhasindhurasimhanade, vadidvipoddala nadurdharavagvivade | srisomadevamunipe vacanarasale, vagisvaro'pi purato'sti na vadakale || .

and seems to have taken to poetry late in his life. But his devotion to his second love was no less sincere, and apparently he came to realise that poetry was an exacting mistress. As he says at the beginning of his work, nidram vidurayasi sastrarasam runatsi sarvendriyarthamasamarthavidhim vidhatse | cetasca vibhramayase kavite pisaci lokastathapi sukrti tvadanugrahena || 1. 41. "Thou Muse, thou evil genius, thou dost dismiss sleep, hinder delight in the Sastras, reduce all the senses to impotence, and bewilder the mind. Yet men are lucky if they obtain thy favour." The combination of Tarka and Poetry, so prominent in the case of Somadeva, is not an isolated phenomenon in Indian literary history. Sriharsa, the author of Naisadhacarita and Khandanakhandakhadya, is a classio example of this tendency, which is also observed occasionally in lesser known poets. We may refer, for example, to Trailokya who flourished in Kashmir in the first half of the twelfth century, and is mentioned by Mankhaka in Srikanthacarita 25. 65, 66.¹ It is noteworthy that Mankhaka compares Trailokya to Tutatita or Kumarila, who is also supposed to have been a Tarkika as well as a Kavi, although no poem composed by him has come down to us. It may be safely assumed that Yasastilaka was the product of that period of Somadeva's life when his poetic power had reached its full maturity. The author makes certain claims for his work which will bear the scrutiny of investigation. First, he says that he composed his work without aid from any source and without any model before him, and therefore compares it to a gem produced by the ocean. asahayamanadarsa ratnam ratnakaradiva | mattah kavyamidam jatam satam hrdayamandanam || 1. 14. The claim of originality, like all such claims, may be admitted only in a limited sense. Somadeva cannot claim any originality regarding the plot, but there are some novel features in regard to the form and contents of the romance, which distinguish it from other versions of the story of Yasodhara and, indeed, from other prose romances extant in Prakrit or Sanskrit. It may be added that the claim of originality is in conformity with Somadeva's idea that a poet should rely upon his own efforts and not imitate or borrow from others. He declares that the poet, who keeps before him the works of his predecessors and consults them again and again and expresses himself in the same manner or differently, is a plagiarist (poetry thief') and a sinner. 1 drdho'pi tarkakarkasye pragalbhah kavikarmani | yah sritutatitasyeva punarjanmantaragrahah || tam sritrailokyamalokya ganyam satkarmirna dhuri | yayau muhuradhijyasya karmukasya sadharmatam || . Jonaraj& remarks in his commentary : tutatitah kumarilah | sa hi tarkikah kavisvasit | .

1. SOMADEVA AND HIS AGE krtva krtih purvakrtah purastat pratyadaram tah punariksamanah | tathaiva jalpedatha yo'nyatha va sa kavyacoro'stu sa pataki ca || 1. 13. 13 It is, however, conceded that occasional similarity with other writers in ideas or expression cannot detract from the merits of a poet who is not in the habit of looking into the works of others. krtih paresamavilokamanastaduktivaktapi kavirna hinah | 1. 12. Somadeva's theory of poetical self-sufficiency is no doubt exaggerated and belied by literary history, but we may be certain that he relied mainly upon his own resources in the composition of his encyclopedic work. Secondly, Somadeva says that he who has the curiosity to go through his work can avail himself of poetic utterances, appropriate dicta, and the tenets of all the S'astras. uktayah kavitakantah suktayo'vasarocitah | yuktayah sarvasastrantastasya yasyatra kautukam || 1. 15. This is not an empty boast or arrogant self-assertion. Poetic merits apart, Yasastilaka is, indeed, a storehouse of information concerning the tenets of various Sastras and schools of thought; and this aspect of the work conforms to the theory of Vyutpatti held by Somadeva himself and the writers on poetics. Somadeva tells us that there is one type of Kavya, 'sweet to the ears' and eloquent with descriptions, and another type which charms the heart, being replete with meaning: no wise man will find fault with either of these, but proper and fit is that kind of composition which contributes to the all-round vyutpatti or scholarly instruction of the author himself and others. kimcit kavyam sravanasubhagam varnanodirnavanam, kimcidvacyocitaparicayam hrn camatkarakari | atrasuyet ka iha sukrti kimtu yuktam taduktam, yadvyutpatyai sakalavisaye svasya canyasya ca syat || 1. 16. The Vyutpatti mentioned by Somadeva has two aspects. The Vyutpatti of the poet is his scholarly training; and the idea of it appears in a systematic form in most writers on poetics, who lay stress on the importance of Vyutpatti as a supplementary discipline reinforcing Sakti or Pratibha, or natural genius; while, among poets, Mankhaka emphasizes the value of Vyutpatti or Panditya in his Srikanthacarita (2. 5, 27, 45-48). Certain writers, e. g., Mammata, and especially Rajasekhara' who is closely followed by HemacanRajasekhara in Kavyamimamsa, chap 8, envisages a wide range of intellectual equipment for a poet, and enumerates twelve recognised sources of poetry: Sruti; Smrti; Itihasa; Purana; Pramanavidya or the philosophical systems; Samayavidya or sectarian systems like those of the Saivas, the Pancaratras, and the Buddhists, popularly called Agama; the three Rajasiddhantas consisting of Polity, Erotics, and Dramaturgy; Loka or a knowledge of the world, its geography and customs; Viracana or fanciful stories and conceits; and Prakirnaka or miscellaneous subjects like the science of elephants, the Dhanurveda, the science of gems, treatises on Yoga etc.

dra, and Vagbhata, the author of Kavyanusasana, and Ksemendra, in his Kavikanthabharana, who employs the term Paricaya for Vyutpatti, clearly enumerate the various branches of learning, with all or some of which the poet is expected to show his acquaintance. Considered from this standpoint, Somadeva's statement that his Kavya is a repertory of all the Sastras is corroborated to a large extent by an examination of the contents of the work, and there are few works in Kavya literature which fulfil the conditions of Vyutpatti so completely as Somedeva's Yasastilaka. The Vyutpatti of others', that is, of the readers of a poem refers to their instruction in the topics of the Sastras, so that a Kavya is viewed as a kind of introduction to the learned branches of study. Somadeva's view of this aspect of Vyutpatti may be correlated with the opinion of Bhamaha, who says in his Kavyalankara (chap. V) that the Sastras are, as a rule, difficult to understand and shunned by the untalented, who, however, enjoy them when mixed with the sweet potion of poetry, just as people take an unpalatable dose of medicine after tasting honey." In other words, the sastric pill is to be sugared with poetry for the benefit of those who are unable to swallow it as it is. The difficult topics of the Sastras should be made interesting and popular through poetry, and this the poet can do by expounding or referring to them in the course of his Kavya. Bhamaha, accordingly, goes on to say that there is no topic-no word, no meaning, no principle of logic, and no art or science-which does not serve as an element in poetical composition, and the poet's burden is undoubtedly great.* It will be thus seen that the idea that a Kavya should be a medium of instruction for its readers was prevalent long before the tenth century, and this idea no doubt greatly influenced the scope and composition of Somadeva's Yasastilaka. Somadeva speaks of the great transmuting power of poetry. The true poets are those whose words make familiar things unfamiliar and unfamiliar things familiar. ta eva kavayo loke yesam vacanagocarah | sapurvo'purvatamartho yatyapurvah sapurvatam || 1.25. This somehow reminds us of certain lines of Wordsworth on the contemplation of Nature: 2 Familiar things and awful, the minute And grand, are destined here to meet......3 1 prayena durbodhataya sastrad vibhyatyamedhasah | tadupacchandanayaisa hetunyayalavoccayah || svadukavyarasonmisram sastramapyupa- yunjate | prathamalidhamadhavah pibanti katu bhesajam || na sa sabdo na tadvacyam na sa nyayo na sa kala | jayate yanna kavyangamaho bharo mahan kaveh || . 3 Herbert Read: Wordsworth, p 193. The lines occur in the first draft of a passage intended as an alternative for some lines in Book VIII of the Prelude,

But it is obviously the genius of the poet, working on a broader canvas, that makes the familiar awful and the awful familiar. Somadeva asserts that even the animals are thrilled with joy when they hear the utterances of a good poet. This is an exaggeration, but he have in mind the musical effect of lyric poetry. may The question of appreciation of poetry is considered by Somadeva from the standpoint of poets in several verses. The poets are said to be fond of people who may not be learned, but who can grasp the trend of the spoken word. In other words, learning is not necessary for the appreciation of poetry: the excellence of gold is, for instance, demonstrated by the The ability of laymen to judge touchstone which is of inferior value." the merits of poetry, although they are not poets themselves, is set forth by citing the example of the man who can discern the flavour of sweets while eating, although he is ignorant of the process of boiling sugar. As for princes, poetical efforts are useless when a king lacks in judgment; it The is no use putting rich fare before an animal who feeds on grass." populace also lacks in judgment and delights in a poem, simply because it is reputed to be good; it often happens that literary works are held in esteem solely on account of their being accepted as good by others, just as a woman acquires a reputation for beauty when she becomes someone's mistress. In matters affecting poetry, one should appeal to the judgment only of those who, like the ocean, 'keep within' (i. e. bear in mind) what is good, and throw out what is bad; that is, the true critic is one who appFurther, a thing reciates the merits of a poem, ignoring the defects. ought to be judged on its own merits and not in relation to a type to which it does not belong; it is futile to look for the sheen of gold while testing silver. In other words, poetry must be judged as poetry, and the critic must not expect to find in it what does not properly fall within the province of poetry." Those who are blind to merits, being intent on fault-finding, and try to pass off blemishes as merits are unfit to study poetry: being the enemies of the goddess of learning, they have indeed no right to study it." Finally, it is useless to argue whether any one 1 ta eva sukavervacastirascamapi yah srutah | bhavantyanandanisyandamandaromanca hetavah || 1.26. 2 abudhe'pyuktiyuktijne kavinamutsavo mahan | gunah kim na suvarnasya vyajyante nikasopale || 3 avaktapi svayam lokah kamam kavyapariksakah | rasapakanabhijno'pi bhokta vetti na kim rasam || 4 vrtha vaktuh sramah sarvo nirvicare naresvare | prajyabhojyavidhih kah syattanasvadini dehini || 5 anganavadviro ganyah prayenanyaparigrahat | svayam vicarasunyo hi prasiddhaya rajyate janah || 6 kavyakathasu ta eva hi kartavyah saksinah samudrasamah | gunaganamantarnidadhati dosamalam ye bahisca kurvanti || 1. 28. 1. 29. 1. 30. 1. 32. 136. 7 atmasthitervastu vicaraniyam na jatu jatyantarasamsrayena | durvarnanirvarnavidhau budhanam suvarnavarnasya mudhanubandhah || 1. 37. 8 gunesu ye dosamanisayandha dosan gunikartumathesate va | srotum kavinam vacanam na te'rhah sarasvatidrohisu ko'dhikarah || 1. 38.

is a poet or not, since in the ultimate resort the ears and minds of the readers are capable of discerning the true nature of the spoken word and its significance respectively." Somadeva exploited to the full the resources of the Sanskrit language, and has an undisputed claim to rank as a classical writer; but he could not altogether.escape the influence of Jaina literary usage in handling Sanskrit prose and verse. A glaring instance is his use of imaih for ebhih, a Prakritism found also in some other Jaina Sanskrit writers. He writes also klesa-bhajanah more than once (e. g., in 3. 388 and towards the end of Book VI), which is clearly against classical usage. A serious grammatical mistake oecurs in 3. 480. surapaticadhuhasollasasriyam srayadakrtih | prathamasamaye candrohayotastavastu mude sada || Here srayat, although it forms part of a Bahuvrihi compound, is made to govern sriyam. The editors of the N. S. edition of Yasastilaka propose to read 'cchavisraya', but not only the printed text but the three manuscripts used by me have the incorrect form. An instance of loose construction is kinasa-kelim anavapta-dhiyah in 2. 130. The commentator explains the phrase by supposing prati to be understood between the two compounds: kinasakelim yamakridam prati anavaptadhiyah apraptabuddhayah yavanmaranam nayatityarthah Such irregularities are, however, few and far-between, and perhaps negligible considering the bulk of the work. One of the most conspicuous characteristics of Somadeva as a writer is his use of numerous rare and unfamiliar words, many of which are not found elsewhere in Sanskrit literature. The command of vocabulary makes Yasastilaka an exceptionally fruitful source of Sanskrit lexicography, but the use of far-fetched words sometimes gives a pedantic air to the work. Somadeva is not, indeed, the word-hunter ridiculed by Athenaeus*; he is rather the learned researcher who tries to bring into use obsolete words. As a matter of fact, he distinctly refers to this aspect of his literary effort, when he says at the end of Book V that he has resuscitated words that had been swallowed by the crooked monster of Time. aralakalavyalena ye lidhah sampratam tu te | sabdah srisomadevena protthapyante kimadbhutam || While Somadeva thus claims to have rescued long-forgotten words from oblivion, he also states that he has recovered words lying hidden at the bottom of the ocean of the Sastras, and that with these gems of words he has made an ornament for the Goddess of speech. 1 ayam kavinaisa kavih kimatra hetuprayuktih krtibhirvidheya | srotram manascatra yatah samartha vagarthayo rupanirupanaya || 1.39. 2 vihitanandamahotsavah kulavadhugitaprasadyairimaih | 2. 229 ; kim vedoktairimaih suktaireta singanupasmahe Book IV, p. 118. 3 See Jacobi's Preface to Upamitibhavaprapanca Katha, p. XX. 4 Deipnosophistae, III, 98.

1. SOMADEVA AND HIS AGE uddhrtya sastrajaladhernitale nimanaih paryagatairiva ciradabhidhanaratnaih | ya somadeva vidusa vihita vibhusa vagdevata vahatu samprati tamanargham || 17 In the latter verse Somadeva evidently refers to the unfamiliar words and the technical terms of the Sastras which he has used in his Kavya. This was, in fact, a trait of Kavya trait of Kavya literature, especially of the later period, but Somadeva seems in this respect to have gone further than any other writer of the age. Somadeva, like Bhavabhuti, sometimes gives expression to a sense of over-confidence in his own powers, and claims something like a monopoly of poetical talents (End of Book IV). maya vagarthasambhare bhukte sarasvate rase | kavayo'nye bhavisyanti nunamucchistabhojanah || In another place he says that if there are any honest people efficient in the art of poetry and the knowledge of the world, they should make it a point to study the utterances of the poet Somadeva. lokavi kavitve va yadi caturyacancavah | somadevakaveh suktih samabhyasyantu sadhavah || 3. 513. That Somadeva himself was conversant with the art of poetry as well as a lokavid, a as the way of the world, that he was a kavi as well shrewd observer of contemporary society, is apparent from his works, and that is the highest compliment we can pay him. That this was considered high praise even in those times is shown by the fact that Jinasena in his Adipurana I. 56 attributes these qualifications to his guru Virasena, the celebrated author of the Dhavala commentary." Somadeva's self-assertion is in marked contrast to the modesty of an author like Siddharsi, who wrote his great allegorical romance about half a century before Yasastilaka was written.' But it is noteworthy that in the opening verses of Yasastilaka Somadeva makes only modest claims in behalf of his work. He begins by saying that there is nothing that has not been visualized by the all but omniscient poets of old; and it is a miracle when a present-day poet, however sharp in intellect he may be, happens to make any utterance comparable to theirs (1. 11). As regards his own Kavya, he opines that it will create fun among the wicked, but will contribute towards the intellectual growth of the wise, while those who are impartial will not remain silent about the work. He hopes that the wise, whose sensibility has been made extremely dull by partaking of the excessive sweetness of 1 lokavittvam kavitvam ca sthitam bhattarake dvayam | vagmita vagmino yasya vaca vacaspaterapi || . 2 In 908 A. D. See Jacobi's Preface to his ed. of Upamitibhavaprapanca katha, p. xxi. 3 sarvajnakalpaih kavibhih puratanairaviksitam vastu kimasti samprati | aidamyuginastu kusagradhirapi pravakti yattatsadrsam sa vismayah || 3

the works of the meritorious poets, might have a liking for the utterances of poets like himself, just as they would relish Neem leaves after excessive indulgence in sweets (1. 22-3). durjananam vinodaya budhanam matijanmane | madhyasthanam na maunaya manye kavyamidam bhavet || sukavikathamadhurya prabandhasevativrddhajadyanam | picumandakandalisviva bhavatu rucirmadvidhoktisu budhanam || Despite the all-round importance of Somadeva as a writer, he seems to have exercised very little influence in any department of thought outside the sphere of Jaina religious literature. He was completely ignored by the non-Jaina literati, and his literary rehabilitation is due to the interest taken in him by modern research. He seems to have found only one commentator for his Yasastilaka, the Jaina Srutasagara Suri who wrote his works early in the 16 th century. As regards Nitivakyamrta, there is an anonymous commentary extant on the work, of unknown date: it is, however, full of quotations from ancient writers on Smrti and polity, and its author was a non-Jaina as he salutes Hari at the beginning of the work." The literary fortunes of Somadeva are a sad commentary on how the achievement of a writer of genius can be neutralized by sectarian indifference and religious prejudices; but, as we shall see, Somadeva himself was imbued with such influences, and could hardly expect recognition outside the circle of his co-religionists. On matters relating to Jaina dogma he has always been recognised as an authoritative writer, and it is noteworthy that, in a number of verses quoted by Srutasagara in his commentary on Kundakunda's Bhava. pahuda (V. 34), Somadeva is mentioned among the great teachers of Jainism: atha ke te acarya yaih krtam sastram pramanikriyate ityaha- sribhadrabahuh sricandro jinacandro mahamatih | grdhrapicchaguruh sriman lohacaryo jitendriyah || elacaryah pujyapadah simhanandi mahakavih | viraseno jinaseno gunanandi mahatapah || samantabhadrah srikumbhah sivakotih sivamkarah | sivayano visnuseno gunabhadro gunadhikah || akalanko mahaprajnah somadevo vidamvarah | prabhacandro nemicandra ityadimunisattamaih || yacchastram racitam nunam tadevadeyamanyakaih | visamdhai racitam naiva pramanam sadhvapi sphutam || Citations from Yasastilaka are often found in later Jaina literature, e. g., in Padmaprabha's commentary on Niyamasara (v. 101), Asadhara's commentary on his Anagara-dharmamrta (2. 75, 9. 81, 98), Brahmadeva's commentary on Yogindudeva's Paramatmaprakasa (2. 15), and frequently in 1 Pt. Premi: Jaina Sahitya aura Itihasa, p. 410. 2 On the quotations in the Commentary, see O. Stein's paper in the Atmananda Centenary Commemoration Volume, Bhavangar 1936, pp. 150-67. A commentary Jaina author is known to exist. It was on Nitivakyamrta in Kannada by a composed by Neminatha about the middle of the twelfth century A. D. See Pt. Premi (op. cit.), p. 80.

Srutasagara's commentary on the Prabhrtas of Kundakunda.' The following verse of Yasastilaka (VIII. 34) is found with a slight variation in Sivakoti's Ratnamala, this writer being different from the ancient author of that name. sarva eva hi jainanam pramanam laukiko vidhih | yatra samyaktvahanirna yatra na vratadusanam || The following three verses are cited from Yasastilaka VI. 1 in Subhacandra's Jnanarnava (under 4. 27). jnanahine kriya pumsi param narabhate phalam | taroschayeva kim labhya phalasrirnastadrstibhih || jnanam panga kriya candhe nihsraddhe narthakrdddvayam | tato jnanam kriya sraddha tryam tatpadakaranam || hatam jnanam kriyasunyam hata cajnaninah kriya | dhavannapyandhako nastah pasyannapi ca pangukah || It may be noted that the third verse does not belong to Somadeva, as it appears in his work as a quotation introduced by the phrase uktam ca. Another verse of Somadeva occurring in Yasastilaka VI. 21 is quoted in Jnanarnava (under 6. 8): uktam ca granthantare: mudhatrayam madascastau tathanayatanani sat | astau sankadayasceti drgadosah pancavimsatih || Somadeva's verse karta na tavadiha ko'pi dhiyecchaya va drsto'nyatha katakrtavapi sa prasamgah | 3 karya kimatra sadanadisu taksakadyairahatya cet tribhuvanam purusah karoti || ( Yasastilaka 2. 139 ) is quoted anonymously in Sarvadarsanasamgraha in the chapter on Jaina philosophy. A verse occurring in Yasastilaka in the philosophical dialogue towards the end of Book V (p. 257) is quoted as follows in Anantavirya's commentary on Pariksamukhasutra (Visayasamuddesa): tatha coktam tadaharjasta nehato raksodrsterbhavasmrteh | bhutananvayanat siddhah prakrtijnah sanatanah || iti | Hiralal says in his Catalogue of Sanskrit and Prakrit manuscripts in C. P. and Berar (P. XXXII) that in the Stotracatustayatika Vidyananda makes frequent references to and quotations from Dhyana-paddhati of Somadeva Suri. This may be another work by our author.' It is, however, possible that this Dhyana-paddhati is not an independent work; but may turn out to be the elaborate discourse on meditation (Dhyanavidhi) in Yasastilaka VIII. 39. As a poet, Somadeva's contribution to Kavya literature is substantial enough to justify his claim to be regarded as a worthy successor of Magha. The poetry of Yasastilaka has been analysed elsewhere, and it 1 Satprabhrtadi-samgrahah, Manikacandra Digambara Jaina Granthamala, 17. 2 Included in Siddhantasaradi-samgrahah, Ibidem 22. 3 It is uncertain whether the verses are actually quoted by the author of Jnanarnava or merely occur in the manuscripts of the work. The Jnanarnava is an original composition in fluent Sanskrit verse dealing with certain aspects of Jaina doctrine . A careful examination of the available manuscripts of the work will help to decide whether the quotations are genuine.

will be seen that Somadeva not only deals with the usual themes of Kavya but adds to the rich fund of Sanskrit poetry by his treatment of topics not usually dealt with in Kavya literature. He gives us vivid and intimate pictures of court life not found elsewhere, and their accuracy is apparently due to the fact that they are drawn from personal observation and experience. He depicts also other aspects of life, and among his most notable verses may be included those on child life, the cremation ground, and the goddess Candamari. He is a sympathetic observer of animals, and some of his verses on animal life are among the best of their kind in Sanskrit literature. He has introduced Jaina religious themes into Kavya poetry, and his verses on the Anupreksas are an important contribution to the literature on the subject. The use of Prakrit metres in Sanskrit verse is also a noteworthy experiment; and Somadeva has in this connection made a lyrical effort which merits attention as being anterior to the composition of Jayadeva's Gitagovinda. Perhaps the most interesting body of verse in Yasastilaka is that dealing with the vices and foibles of the ministers of kings, and the verses in question, varied and extensive as they are, constitute the first systematic attempt at political satire in Sanskrit poetry, and remind us of the satirical verse of Ksemendra, who in his Narmamala attacks the Kayastha or the official caste of Kashmir. The later poet writes in a lighter vein, but his work is richer in concrete details, and covers a wider ground than the corresponding verses of Somadeva. The object of the latter is edification rather than entertainment, but from a historical point of view the observations of both the writers are important as throwing light on some of the abuses of the times. Somadeva may be said to have introduced in this respect a new theme in Sanskrit poetry, which was later developed with ampler details by Ksemendra. Somadeva is not a great inspired poet: he is sometimes artificial and suffers from verbosity and repetition of ideas. But his verse often throbs with the currents of contemporary life, and he ranks supreme among the Jaina Sanskrit poets who have adopted the kavya style as a vehicle of expression. He has, besides, given effective expression to some of the noble teachings of Jainism in Sanskrit verse. The subject has been treated in another chapter, but we may cite here a notable verse which enshrines the idea of returning good for evil. ajnanabhavadasubhasayadva kurvita cet ko'pi janah khalatvam | tathapi sadbhih priyameva cintyam na mathyamane'pyamrte visam hi || 1 See Chapter VII.

Even if any one resorts to villainy from ignorance or evil motives, the good should think of doing only good. Nectar never becomes poison even when it is churned' (Yasastilaka, 1. 151). This is, indeed, not a new idea in Indian literature; and we may cite, for instance, the ancient Buddhist dictum: Enmity is not calmed by enmity (na vairena vairani samyante). Nevertheless it represents one of the cardinal teachings of Jainism, and the exhortation is in harmony with the love for all creatures inculcated elsewhere in Somadeva's Yasastilaka.2