The Bhikṣuṇī Maṇimēkhalai

68 - How Far Historical in Character?
To illustrate our position we have only to take up that single incident
drawn incidentally from a free comparison of Yaugandharāyaṇa’s
appearance at the city of Ujjain in the circumstances in which this has
been introduced in the Maṇimēkhalai. Scholars are not yet agreed as
far the Sanskrit versions of the Paiśāci original actually follow the
text. A connected question with this is the Bhāsa problem which has
been receiving a great deal of attention in recent times. If this single
incident may not do to settle those questions, it may throw its own
particular light upon them and, if a few other [34] specimens like this
could be got together, the light that we gain may be adequate for a
reasonable settlement of the whole question.
It would be an interesting question whether the knowledge that the
author of the Maṇimēkhalai had of Yaugandharāyaṇa’s achievement
translations, or even the drama of Bhāsa, Pratijñā-Yaugandharāyaṇa.
That is only so far by the way. The general conclusions that may be
drawn from these elements of Sanskrit culture in the Tamil classic is
to a very great extent supported by the Śangam classics themselves as
a whole. Scholars argue that the incursion of Sanskrit culture into the
Tamil land was a product of much later times and therefore works
that show that infiltration must be of a later age. Such an argument is
putting the cart before the horse. It is essential to any conclusion of
that kind that a serious examination should be made of the elements
of Sanskritic culture in Tamil before we could formulate a position as
to the actual age of the infusion of this culture. To this end the
examination above made of the elements of Sanskrit culture in the
Maṇimēkhalai may make its own slight contribution.