Dandin's Indebtedness to Subandhu

Summary

The essay evaluates the literary relationship between two eminent Sanskrit prose writers, Subandhu and Dāṇḍin. Subandhu’s *Vāsavadattā* is known for its ornate diction, complex compounds and elaborate puns, while Dāṇḍin’s *Daśakumāracarita* and *Kāvyādarśa* combine narrative interest with stylistic analysis. The author notes that Dāṇḍin rarely acknowledges Subandhu directly and often emphasises his debt to Bāṇa. However, a close examination of his work reveals several borrowings from Subandhu’s style. Dāṇḍin alludes to another writer named Subandhu and praises his story, suggesting that he was familiar with the *Vāsavadattā*. His prose occasionally imitates Subandhu’s penchant for punning and wordplayfile:///home/oai/share/520753%20(3)%20293-397.pdf. The article compares passages from the two authors to show similar metaphors and narrative motifs. Despite these similarities, Dāṇḍin’s style remains distinct. He is more flexible in his use of compounds and pays greater attention to plot development. While Subandhu’s work often prioritises wordplay over narrative coherence, Dāṇḍin integrates ornamental language into a more engaging story. The author therefore argues that Dāṇḍin owes more to Bāṇa than to Subandhu in terms of narrative technique, but Subandhu’s influence is unmistakable in his punning style. By acknowledging both sources, we can better appreciate Dāṇḍin’s place within the evolution of Sanskrit prose. The essay concludes that Subandhu’s contribution to Sanskrit prose should not be underestimated. Even though Dāṇḍin does not explicitly credit him, his stylistic debt is evident in the use of elaborate puns and ornate descriptionsfile:///home/oai/share/520753%20(3)%20293-397.pdf. Recognising this indebtedness helps scholars trace the development of Sanskrit prose aesthetics.