वासवदत्ता (महाकवि सुबन्धु - श्लेष-प्रधान शास्त्रीय गद्यकाव्य सान्वय सटीक)

8 VĀSAVADATTĀ the criticism of Telang, ib. 18. 148–150). Since, however, Dharmakīrti is described by I-Tsing, who travelled in India in 671–695 A. D., as among those ‘of late years’ (Record of the Buddhist Religion, tr. Takakusu, p. 181, cf. p. lviii, Oxford, 1896); and since Tāranātha (Geschichte des Buddhismus in Indien, tr. Schiefner, pp. 184–185, St. Petersburg, 1869) makes him a con- temporary of the Tibetan king, Srong-btsan-sgam-po, who died about 650 A. D. (Duff, Chronology of India, p. 53, Westminster, 1899), Lévi (‘La Date de Candragomin,’ in Bulletin de l'École d'Extrême-Orient, 1903, p. 18; cf. Kern, Manual of Indian Buddhism, p. 130, note 11, Strassburg, 1896) is doubtless right in denying that Subandhu makes any allusion to Dharmakīrti’s activity (for an opposing view see Krishnamachariar, Introd., p. 32). This leaves but a single literary allusion in the Vāsavadattā which can in any way be construed as casting light on the date of the romance. The reference in question is nyāyasthitim ivō 'ddyōtakarasvarūpām, ‘⟨revealing her beauty⟩ as the permanence of the Nyāya system has its ⟨form from Uddyōtakara⟩’ (ed. Hall, p. 235). Since we know that Uddyōtakara wrote his Nyāya- vārttika to refute the heterodox (i.e., Buddhist) views of Dignāga, who flourished between 520 and 600 A. D. (Kern, op. cit. p. 129; Müller, Six Systems of Indian Philosophy, p. 477, London, 1899), it is obvious that Uddyōtakara, to whom Subandhu so unmis- takably refers, can not have lived before the latter part of the sixth century. It is, therefore, certain that the Vāsavadattā can not be prior to the late sixth century of our era. The Date of Subandhu. There is but one allusion in Subandhu's romance itself which can be interpreted as referring to a historical event. This is the tenth introductory stanza: sā rasavattā vihatā navakā vilasanti carati nō kaṃ kaḥ¹ sarasī ’va kīrtiśēṣaṃ gatavati bhuvi vikramādityē, ‘⟨moisture⟩ is destroyed, ≪cranes sport not≫, ⋘the heron fares not forth⋙; yea, ⟨eloquence⟩ is destroyed, ≪new-comers make ¹ The theory of Mazumdar (JRAS. 1907, pp. 406–408), that the kaṃ kaḥ of this stanza involves an allusion to a Kaṅka dynasty, must be regarded as not proven.