A History of Sanskrit Literature c3.27

c3.27

On Çivadāsa's version of the *Vetālapañcaviṅçatikā* much light has been thrown by Hertel's researches.⁶ He establishes that Çivadāsa used a version in verse, whence some stanzas of merit, including those cited below (p. 290), are taken; the many verse fragments found in his prose are explained by the origin of his work. Similar features are not rare in late texts, such as Meghavijaya's *Pañcākhyānoddhāra*, the *textus simplicior* of the *Çukasaptati*, the *Madanarekhākathā*, the *Kusumasārakathā*, the *Aghaṭakumārakathā*,¹ and that version of the *Vetālapañcaviñçatikā* which goes back to Kṣemendra's verse rendering. This, however, does not decide the question of the original form of the *Vetālapañcaviñçatikā*; the common source of Kṣemendra and Somadeva may have been in prose or prose and verse; we have not sufficient evidence to show which. Hertel proves by comparison of texts that Çivadāsa was deeply influenced in vocabulary and syntax by Old Gujarātī, and concludes that he was a man of small education, belonging to the class who did not use Sanskrit as their 'Hochsprache', but understood it *tant bien que mal*, and endeavoured to express themselves in it.