A History of Sanskrit Literature c10.s1.13

c10.s1.13

There is not the slightest doubt of one of the sources of Açvaghoṣa. Though Cowell was unable to find decisive proof of his knowledge of the *Rāmāyaṇa* as opposed merely to the legend of Rāma, the fact is put beyond doubt, apart from a mention of the poem in the *Sūtrālaṅkāra*, by careful study of the references in the *Buddhacarita* itself¹; when the people of the town see that Siddhārtha has not returned they weep as aforetime when the chariot of Daçaratha’s son returned without him; Çuddhodana compares himself to Daçaratha, bereft of Rāma, whose death he envies, and in these and many other passages there is clear knowledge by Açvaghoṣa of the wording of our present text. It was natural that the parallel should deeply affect Açvaghoṣa, and the broad structure of the episode of the return of Sumantra to Ayodhyā without Rāma and of Chandaka to Kapilavāstu without Siddhārtha is unmistakable; the charioteer leaves his master, and returns to the city now sadly changed; the eager citizens rush out to greet him, learn his news, and are filled with lamentation; the women throng the windows and then withdraw in deep depression to their inner chambers; the charioteer enters the presence of the king. Similarly again, Yaçodharā’s lament for the sufferings of the prince in his new life of hardship is modelled on Sītā’s sorrow for her husband’s sufferings in the forest. Nor does it seem reasonable to deny that the description of the aspect of the women of the harem in sleep is based on the portraiture of Rāvaṇa’s harem.²