काव्यमीमांसा (महाकवि राजशेखर - कवि-रहस्य एवं देश-विभाग सटीक)

200 EXPLANATORY NOTES Rājaśekhara instructs poets not to indulge in sexual excesses and advises them to have recourse to women only to remove their आर्ति or mental weakness. Similar usage can be found in the Mahābhāṣya of Patañjali (1-1-1) where the word खेद is used instead of आर्ति. Cf. खेदात् स्त्रीषु प्रवृत्तिर्भवति । समानश्च खेदविगमो गम्यायां चागम्यायाञ्च । The word खेद is explained by Kaiyaṭa while commenting on the Mahābhāṣya Paspaśāhnika as below :— खेदादिति । खेदयतीति खेदः रागः । इन्द्रियनियमासामर्थ्यं वा खेदः। Page. 53. l. 7. व्यवायः=Sexual intercourse. *[ l. 15. श्रूयन्ते दृश्यन्ते च cf. सन्त्यपि खलु शास्त्रप्रहतबुद्धयो गणिका राजपुत्र्यो महा- मात्रदुहितरश्च (वा. काम. सू. 1-3-12). Read in the text महामात्रदुहितरो and शास्त्रप्रहतबुद्धयः. Rājaśekhara (quoted in the Sūktimuktāvali) praises four such poetesses. (1) शीलाभट्टारिका (2) विकटनितम्बा (3) विजयाङ्का (4) प्रभुदेवी. शब्दार्थयोः समो गुम्फः पाञ्चाली रीतिरुच्यते । शीलाभट्टारिकावाचि बाणोक्तिषु च सा यदि ॥ के वैकटनितम्बेन गिरां गुम्फेन रञ्जिताः । निन्दन्ति निजकान्तानां न मौग्ध्यमधुरं वचः ॥ सरस्वतीय कर्णाटी विजयाङ्का जयत्यसौ । या वैदर्भंगिरां वासः कालिदासादनन्तरम् ॥ सूक्तीनां स्मरकेलीनां कलानां च विलासभूः । प्रभुदेवी कविर्लाटी गतापि हृदि तिष्ठति ॥ also नीलोत्पलदलश्यामां विजकां तामजानता । वृथैव दण्डिनाप्युक्तं सर्वशुक्ला सरस्वती ॥ ] ll. 14–16. Avantisundarī, the wife of Rājaśekhara was a cul- tured lady, a poetess and a critic. Rājaśekhara also introduces in his dramas many female characters who are adepts in composing verses in different dialects. The word दृश्यन्ते in addition to श्रूयन्ते clearly shows that ladies gifted with poetic skill and culture were found in abundance during Rājaśekhara's life-time. In addition to four poetesses शीलाभट्टारिका, विकटनितम्बा, विजयाङ्का, and प्रभुदेवी one more poetess सुभद्रा also is praised by Rājaśekhara in one of his verses quoted in the Sūktimuktāvali p. 47 : पार्थस्य मनसि स्थानं लेभे लघु सुभद्रया । कवीनां च वचोवृत्तिश्चातुर्येण सुभद्रया ॥

TENTH ADHYĀYA 201 l. 17. आदर्शः=copy. A poet should prepare several copies of his composition. l. 25. एकावली=a single string of pearls. Page. 54. l. 3. For the definitions of मुक्तक, see notes on page 46, l. 22. सङ्घातः । The definitions of सङ्घात are given as:— एकप्रघट्टकेनैव निबद्धो वाक्यविस्तरः । स संघातो भवेत् Bhāvaprakāśana. p. 151–16. and यत्र श्लोककृतो युक्तिसमुदायो रसान्वितः । एकप्रघट्टके सोऽयं सङ्घात इति कथ्यते ॥ Ibid. p. 282–20. Daṇḍin mentions सङ्घात as a sub-division of सर्गबन्ध and his com- mentator Taruṇavācaspati defines it as follows:— सङ्घातः एकार्थविषयः एककर्तृकः पद्यसंघातः । शरत्सङ्घातद्रविडसंघातादिवत् ॥ Kāvyādarśa. 1–13. Mahāprabandha has been defined by all earlier writers on poetics, but Abhinavagupta's definition, as given below, seems to be the best: महाकाव्यरूपः पुरुषार्थफलः समस्तवस्तुवर्णनाप्रबन्धः सर्गबन्धः संस्कृत एव ॥ (Locana on 3, 7 of the Dhvani) *[ l. 5. बह्वपि स्वेच्छया ( माघ II. 73 ) ] ll. 5–6. This is a verse quoted from the second canto of the Śiśupālavadha where Uddhava gives counsel to Kṛṣṇa and differs from the views expressed by Baladeva. It may also be suggested here, as Rājaśekhara interprets, that Māgha, the author of the Kāvya, being proud of his composition or प्रबन्ध, criticises in this verse the attempts of other poets in order to humiliate them. ll. 7–10. The fundamental principles of poetry are recorded here on the lines indicated by Vāmana. Vāmana thinks that Rītis, Guṇas and Sūktimudrās only are the most important factors for the composition of poetry, but he does not consider the Alaṅkāras to be so important. See Kāvyālaṅkārasūtra 3, 1, 1–3 and the verses quoted there:— २६

202 EXPLANATORY NOTES युवतीरिव रूपमङ्ग काव्यं स्वदते शुद्धगुणं तदप्यतीव । विहितप्रणयं निरन्तराभिः सदलङ्कारविकल्पकल्पनाभिः ॥ यदि भवति वचश्च्युतं गुणेभ्यो वपुरिव यौवनवन्ध्यमङ्गनायाः । अपि जनदयितानि दुर्भगत्त्वं नियतमलङ्करणानि संश्रयन्ते ॥ Bhāmaha and Daṇḍin consider both Guṇa and Alaṅkāra equ- ally important in poetry. cf. न कान्तमपि निर्भूषं विभाति वनितामुखम् ॥ (Bhāmaha. 1–13.) काश्चिन्मार्गविभागार्थमुक्ताः प्रागप्यलङ्क्रियाः । साधारणमलङ्कारजातमद्य प्रदर्श्यते ॥ (Daṇḍin. 2. 3) Bharata, Ānanda and Rudraṭa observe that a poet should princi- pally make an attempt to develop the Rasas in his composition. Though Rājaśekhara is acquainted with the views of these writers, he does not point out here the importance of Alaṅkāra, Rasa and Dhvani in poetry, and his silence in this respect is due, very proba- bly, to the fact that his professed object was to impart lessons on elementary matters in this verse, rather than to waste his time in scholastic discussions. l. 11. अभिधा=word. अभिधोपनिषत्=grammar. l. 16. एकपत्नीव्रतम् । see काम. सू. 4–1 for एकचारिणीवृत्त. एकचारिणी attends to the त्रिवर्ग i. e. Dharma, Artha and Kāma of the husband. Sarasvatī also does the same to a poet who follows the above mentioned methods. l. 18. Construe as :— यस्याः (सिद्धेः) मूलच्छायां सः गिरां गुरुरपि न जानाति । मूलच्छाया=beauty of the foundation. l. 21. अष्टभिर्मत्तवारणीभिः=with eight verandas or pavilions. It is also called कपोतपालिका and is defined as गजदन्तैः कृता शाला विज्ञेया मत्तवारणी । l. 22. मणिभूमिका=bejewelled floor. l. 23. The word संस्कृत denotes here a poet of sanskrit language by its secondary capacity or लक्षणा. l. 25. वेदविद्या=the Vedas and their six Aṅgas शिक्षा etc. l. 26. Pramāṇas are Mīmāṁsā and Tarkas as described in the eighth chapter (see page 36). The word स्मार्ताः here denotes those who are conversant with स्मृतिs and Dharmaśāstras.

TENTH ADHYĀYA 203

*[ l. 26. मौहूर्तिका: cf. मौहूर्तिकपौराणिकसूतमागधाः (अर्थशास्त्र. p. 245) ]. l. 26 अन्येऽपि तथाविधाः refers to specialists in मन्त्र and तन्त्र Śāstras. *[ l. 27. नटनर्तक. cf. नटनर्तकगायकवादकवाग्जीवनकुशीलवप्लवकसौभिकचारणानां सर्वतालावचराणाञ्च (अर्थशास्त्र. p. 125.) also नटनर्तकवादकवाग्जीवनकुशीलवाः Ibid. p. 48. ] l. 27. The word Prākṛta also refers to poets in Prākṛta language by its secondary capacity. नट=a professional actor. Naṭa is defined in the Bhāvapra- kāśana thus:— अतीतं लोकवृत्तान्तं रसभावसमन्वितम् । स्वभाववन्नाटयति यतस्तस्मान्नटः स्मृतः ॥ p. 288, 5-6. नर्तकः=professional actor in the minor dramas such as डोम्बी श्रीगदित etc. He performs नृत्त or नृत्य in these Uparūpakas which are 18 or 20 in number. For detailed information regarding नृत्त and नृत्य and 20 minor kinds of dramas see Bhāvaprakāśana chapters 7, 8 and 10. Page. 55. l. 1. वादनम्=instrumental music. It must be construed with जीवन. कुशीलव=singers behind a dancing girl when she dances, or singers in general. तालावचर=dancers. l. 3. वैकटिकाः=jewellers. वर्धकि=carpenters. l. 4. प्लवक=rope-dancers. शौभिक=juggler. जम्भक=magicians or मायावी. For जम्भकविद्या see Arthaśāstra p. 245–16. *[ l. 7. वासुदेव. There are two such names in ancient history: (1) Vāsudeva Kāṇva, the Brāhmaṇa minister of Devabhūti of the solar race, who usurped the throne made vacant by the murder of Devabhūti and reigned about 73. B. C. (2) Vāsudeva I, the Kushān king who reigned from 140–178 A. D. सातवाहन, the author of गाथाकोश and the patron of poets. His गाथाकोश contains Gāthās of many poets. For the derivation of the word, cf. सातेन यस्माद्वोढोऽभूत् तस्मात्तं सातवाहनम् । नाम्ना चकार कालेन राज्ये चैनं न्यवेशयत् ॥ कथासरित्सागर.

204 EXPLANATORY NOTES सातं दत्तसुखं वाहनमस्य सातवाहनः सालवाहनोऽपि। अभिधानचिन्तामणिटीका. III. 375. जगत्यां प्रथिता गाथा सातवाहनभूभुजा । व्यधुर्वृत्तेस्तु विस्तारमहो चित्रपरम्परा ॥ सूक्तिमुक्तावल्यां राजशेखरः । अविनाशिनमग्राम्यमकरोत्सातवाहनः । विशुद्धजातिभिः कोशं रत्नेरिव सुभाषितैः ॥ हर्षचरित्र. 5. नमः श्रीहारवर्षाय येन हालादनन्तरम् । स्वकोपः कविकोषणामाविर्भावाय सम्भृतः ॥ रामचरित. VI. 93. हालेनोत्तमपूजया कविदृषः श्रीपालितो लालितः ख्यातिं कामपि कालिदासकवयो नीताः शकारातिना । श्रीहर्षो विततार गद्यकवये बाणाय वाणीफलं सद्यः सत्क्रिययाऽभिनन्दमपि च श्रीहारवर्षोऽग्रहीत् ॥ Ibid XXII. 100. cf. तत्थ वि । पालित्तयगालाहणछप्पणयसीहनायसद्देण । संखुद्धमुद्धसारङ्गउ व्व कह ता पयं देमि ॥ निम्मलगुणेण गुणगुरुएण परमत्थसयणसारेण । पालित्तयेण हालो हारेण व सहइ गोट्ठीसु ॥ चक्कायुजुवलसुहया रंमन्तपरायहंसगयहंरिसा । जस्स कुलपव्वयस्स व वियरइ गङ्गा तरङ्गमई ॥ भणियविलासवलन्तचोक्किले जो करेइ हालिए वि । कव्वेण किं पडत्थे हाले हालावियारे व्व ॥ पणईहिं कइएणेण य भमरेहिं व जस्स जायपणएहिं । कमलायरो व्व कोसो विल्लुप्पमाणे वि हु न झीणे ॥ कुवलयमाला of इन्द्रसूरि (दाक्षिण्यचिह्नसूरि) 778 A. D. References to other old poets are also interesting. सयलकलागमनिलया सिक्खावियकवियणा समुहयंदा । कमलासण गुण्ड्ढा सरस्सई जस्स वट्ठकहा ॥ जे भारहरामायणदलियमहागिरिसुगम्ममग्गेण । लंघेइ दिसाकरिणो कइणो को वासवंमीए ॥ छप्पन्नयाण किं वा भज्जइ कयकूंकंजराण भुवर्णसि । अन्ने वि छेयभणिओ अज वि उवमिजए जेहिं ॥ लावण्णवयणुसुहया सुवञ्चरयणुज्जला य बाणस्स । चन्द्रावीणस्स वणे जाया कादंबरी जस्स ॥ जारिसयं विमलंको विमलं को तारिसं लहइ अत्थं । अमयमइयं व सरसं सरसं चिय पाइयं जस्स ॥ तिउरिसचरियपसिद्धो सुपुरिसचरिएण पायडो लोए । सो जयइ देवगुत्तो वंसे गुत्ताण रायरिसी ॥

TENTH ADHYĀYA 205 बुहयणसहस्ससद्दइयं हरिवंसुप्पत्तिकारयं पढमम् । वंदामि वंदियं पि हु हरिवंसं चेय विमलपयम् ॥ सन्निहियजिणवरिंदा धम्मकहा बंधदिक्खियनरिंदा । कहिया जेण सुकहिया सुलोयणा समवसरणं वा ॥ सत्तूण जो जसहरो जसहरचरिएहिं जणवए पयडो । कलिमलपभंजणो च्चिय पहुंजणो आसि रायरिसी ॥ जेहिं कए रमणिज्जे वरंगपउमाण चरियवित्थारे । कह व न सलाहणिज्जे ते कइणो जडियरविसेणो ॥ जो इच्छइ भवविरहं भवविरहंको न बंधए सुयणो । समयसयसत्थगहणो समरमिमंका कहा जस्स ॥ साहसाङ्क is विक्रमादित्य. ] l. 7. सातवाहन । Sātavāhana or S'ālivāhana is a family name. Several princes belonging to the Āndhrabhṛtya dynasty ruled the Mahārāṣṭra country and bore the title of Sātavāhana. There are several literary traditions connected with the Sātavāhana kings who were recognized patrons of poets in Prākṛta languages, such as Paiśācī, Mahārāṣṭrī etc. The Bṛhatkathā of Guṇāḍhya, Kātantra grammar of Sarvavarman, and Gāthāsaptaśatī of Hāla- Sātavāhana, were composed under the patronage of Sātavāhana kings. For further information regarding the Sātavāhanas see Dr. R. G. Bhandarkar's ‘The Early history of the Deccan’ and Vols. XVI and XVIII of the J. B. O. R. S. शूद्रक । S'ūdraka is well known as a king and the author of the drama Mṛcchakaṭika. Several stories are recorded in the Bṛhat- kathā where S'ūdraka plays an important part. The शूद्रककथा or the biography of S'ūdraka has been written by two authors रामिल and सौमिल conjointly. This fact is known only from a verse occurring in the Sūktimuktāvalī, where it is attributed to Rājaśekhara. This verse is given below:— तौ शूद्रककथाकारौ रम्यौ रामिलसौमिलौ । काव्यं ययोर्द्वयोरासीदर्धनारीश्वरोपमम् ॥ Sūktimuktāvalī. p. 43. One सौमिल is also mentioned by Kālidāsa in his Mālavikāgni- mitra along with Bhāsa and Kaviputra and very probably he may be the author of the शूद्रककथा । From the remark शूद्रकादिरचितेषु प्रबन्धेषु occurring in Vāmana's Kāvyālaṅkārasūtra-Vṛtti (3-2-4,) it appears that S'ūdraka had composed several other works in

206 EXPLANATORY NOTES addition to the Mṛcchakaṭika. Kṣīrasvāmin in his commentary on the Amarakośa (2. 8. 2) quotes a set of anonymous verses where the word S'ūdraka is mentioned as the name of a Cakravarti king, who is identified with Agnimitra. The verse in question is as follows:— विक्रमादित्यः साहसाङ्कः शकान्तकः । शूद्रकस्त्वग्निमित्रो वा हालः स्यात्सातवाहनः ॥ Now, it is well known that Agnimitra was the son of the S'uṅga conqueror Puṣyamitra who flourished in the second century B. C. That S'ūdraka was a very noble and highly respected king like Harṣa and Udayana, is known from a reference found in the Hṛdayaṅgamā, a commentary on the Kāvyādarśa, (1-15) which runs as: सदाश्रयम्–हर्षशूद्रकोदयनादिसत्पुरुषाश्रयम् । The prologue of the Mṛcchakaṭika mentions that S'ūdraka performed a horse-sacrifice or Aśvamedha, saw his son ruling the country and entered the fire after having lived for 100 years and ten days. The above leads us to infer that the hero of the Māla- vikāgnimitra was probably identical with king S'ūdraka the author of the Mṛcchakaṭika. The fact that Agnimitra also was a great poet and was as far-famed as Bhāsa and others, is borne out by Vākpatirāja in his verse: भासम्मि जलणमित्ते कुन्तीदेवे अ जस्स रहुआरे । गउडवहो—800. Here ज्वलनमित्र is no other than Agnimitra. The introduction of a Buddhist monk to save the life of Vasantasenā in the Mṛcchakaṭika, and the part played by Paṇḍita Parivrājikā, presumably a Buddhist nun, as the adviser of queen Dhāriṇī in the Mālavikāgnimitra, also show that during the reign of Agnimitra or S'ūdraka, Buddhism was held in high esteem. The following facts, mentioned in the prologue of the Mṛcchakaṭika, (1) द्विजमुख्यतम (2) ऋग्वेदं सामवेदम् (3) राजानं वीक्ष्य पुत्रं परमसमुदयेनाश्वमेधेन चेष्ट्वा लब्ध्वा चायुः शताब्दं दशदिनसहितं शूद्रकोऽग्निं प्रविष्टः । tally in principal details with the historical facts known about the S'uṅgas. We know from history that Puṣyamitra and his son Agnimitra were the Brahmins of the S'uṅgagotra and belonged to the Sāma Veda, and that Puṣyamitra performed an Aśvamedha sacrifice in order to assume the title of Cakravartin. It is worthy of note that the same facts are recorded in the Mṛcchakaṭika. If the proposed identity of

TENTH ADHYĀYA 207 Agnimitra with S'ūdraka is accepted, it should be assumed that Agnimitra also had performed the Aśvamedha like his father, had seen his son Vasumitra rule the country and entered into the fire. The long age of 100 years and ten days attributed to Śūdraka, is also not improbable in the case of Agnimitra because according to the Mālavikāgnimitra, he was only a governor of the southern provinces duriug his father's life-time, and he had at that time a youthful son Vasumitra who was at the head of the army and had followed the sacrificial horse of his grand-father. Agnimitra, therefore, must have lived long enough to rule the country after the lengthy reign of Puṣyamitra, and to see his son Vasumitra installed after himself as king whose reign was for some time interrupted by the rule of one Vasujyeṣṭha probably Agnimitra's brother. Now the date of composition of the Mṛcchakaṭika also falls, according to the above stated evidences, somewhere in the beginning of the first century B. C. In this connection, it may be said that the tradition, attributing the verse लिम्पतीव तमोऽङ्गानि वर्षतीवाञ्जनं नभः । found in the Mṛcchakaṭika and quoted by Daṇḍin in his Kāvyādarśa to one Vikramāditya on the autho- rity of the Subhāṣitāvalī and the Sūktimuktāvalī, should not be taken as correct because S'ūdraka or Agnimitra is not known to have assumed the title of Vikramāditya. l. 11. अवदंश=stimulant. *[ll. 19-25. मेण्ठ is भर्तृमेण्ठ, author of the Hayagrīvavadha. See Rājatarangiṇī 3-26. Verses from this poem are quoted in the present work. वक्रोक्त्या मेण्ठराजस्य वहन्त्या सृणिरूपताम् । आविद्धा इव धुन्वन्ति मूर्धानं कविकुञ्जराः ॥ राजशेखरः सूक्तिमुक्तावल्याम् । स कश्चिदालेख्यकरः कवित्वे प्रसिद्धनामा भुवि भर्तृमेण्ठः । रसप्लवेऽपि स्फुरति प्रकामं वर्णेषु यस्योज्ज्वलता तथैव ॥ उदयसुन्दरी ॥ Rājaśekhara calls himself an incarnation of भर्तृमेण्ठ. बभूव वल्मीकभवः पुरा कविस्ततः प्रपेदे भुवि भर्तृमेण्ठताम् । स्थितः पुनर्यो भवभूतिरेखया स वर्तते सम्प्रति राजशेखरः ॥ बालरामायण. I. 16. सूर may be आर्यसूर the Buddhist poet. cf. also सुबन्धौ भक्तिर्नः क इह रघुकारे न रमते धृतिर्दाक्षीपुत्रे हरति हरचन्द्रोऽपि हृदयम् ।

208 EXPLANATORY NOTES विशुद्धोक्तिः शूरः प्रकृतिमधुरा भारविगिर- स्थाप्यन्तर्मोदं कमपि भवभूतिर्वितनुते ॥ हरिश्चन्द्र— पदबन्धोज्ज्वलो हारी कृतवर्णक्रमस्थितिः । भट्टारहरिचन्द्रस्य गद्यबन्धो नृपायते ॥ हर्षचरित्र I. 4. For वर्ष, उपवर्ष, पाणिनि, व्याडि and वररुचि, see कथासरित्सागर and बृहत्कथा- मञ्जरी-कथापीठलम्बक I. For the controversy between पाणिनि and वररुचि, see कथासरित्सागर कथापीठलम्बक IV. 20-25, and बृहत्कथामञ्जरी कथापीठ II. 71-74. For सभापति cf. लक्ष्मीभुजो भुवि सभापतयः क नाम सन्तीह सम्प्रति गुणेष्वनुरागवन्तः । ये हि प्रलीनखलरोलभराः सुखेन शृण्वन्ति संसदि कवीन्द्रसुभाषितानि ॥ श्रीविक्रमो नृपतिरत्र पतिः सभानामासीत्स कोऽप्यसदृशः कविमित्रनामा । यो वार्थमात्रमुदितः कृतिनां गृहेषु दत्त्वा चकार करटीन्दुघटान्धकारम् ॥ हाले गते गुणिनि शोकभराद्बभूवुरुच्छिन्नवाङ्मयजडाः कृतिनस्तथामी । यत्तस्य नाम नृपतेर्निशं स्मरन्तो हेल्यक्षरं प्रथममेव परं विदन्ति ॥ श्रीहर्ष इत्यवनिवर्तिषु पार्थिवेषु नाम्नैव केवलमजायत वस्तुतस्तु । गीर्हर्ष एष निजसंसदि येन राज्ञा सम्पूजितः कनककोटिशतेन बाणः ॥ सृष्टं तदत्र युवराजनरेश्वरेण यद्दुष्करं किमपि येन गिरः श्रियश्च । प्रत्यायनं स्फुटमकारि निजे कवीन्द्रमेकासने समुपवेशयताभिनन्दम् ॥ उदयसुन्दरी—प्रथमोच्छ्वासः ] l. 20. चन्द्रगुप्तौ. Who is this Candragupta? Is he a different poet from Candragupta II of the Gupta dynasty or is he the same as Candragupta himself? We know that Candragupta bore the epithet of Sāhasāṅka and there is one Sāhasāṅka who is also described as a poet in the verse— भासो रामिलसोमिलौ वररुचिः श्रीसाहसांकः कविः etc. Sūktimuktāvali. It seems probable, therefore, that Candragupta of this verse may refer to the same Sāhasāṅka who is to be identified with Candragupta II of the Gupta dynasty. विशाला=Ujjayinī. l. 22. Here the names उपवर्ष etc. seem to have been arranged in a strictly chronological order, because otherwise, according to the rules of Pāṇini : अल्पाच्तरम्, the word वर्ष must precede उपवर्ष in the compound द्वंद. उपवर्ष is known as the earliest commentator on the Mīmāṁsāsūtras of Jaimini and Bādarāyaṇa. Varṣa is mentioned

ELEVENTH ADHYĀYA 209 as the teacher of Pāṇini in the Kathāsaritsāgara. Pāṇini and Piṅgala are the Sūtrakāras on grammar and prosody. Vyāḍi is the author of a work called "Saṅgraha" which is quoted by Patañjali and Bhartṛhari. cf. संग्रहो व्याडिकृतो लक्षश्लोकसंख्याको ग्रन्थ इति प्रसिद्धिः (Nāgeśa's Uddyota on Mahābhāṣya Kaiyaṭa 1-1-1). Adhyāya XI. Page. 56. Rājaśekhara deals in the following three chapters with the subject of शब्दार्थहरण or plagiarism of both words and ideas. It is in- teresting to note that no author before Rājaśekhara had dealt this subject with such a wealth of detail as is done here. Only Vāmana and Ānandavardhana touched this subject and warned the poets to be very careful in ridding themselves of this pernicious practice. It is, therefore, difficult to discover the source of Rāja- śekhara's information. Among later writers, Kṣemendra treats of this subject in his Kavikaṇṭhābharaṇa with different details, while Hemacandra incorporates all these three chapters in his commentary on the Kāvyānuśāsana. (pp. 8-10.) l. 4. Examples of plagiarism in respect of वृत्त or metre and प्रबन्ध or lengthy poem are not cited in this connection. The view attributed here to the Ācāryas, is traceable in Ānandavardhana's work as well as in the commentary thereon. Cf. अक्षरादिरचनैव योज्यते यत्र वस्तुरचना पुरातनी । नूतने स्फुरति काव्यवस्तुनि व्यक्तमेव खलु सा न दुष्यति ॥ Dhvanyāloka 4-15. But Rājaśekhara differs from him on certain points. *[Borrowed in the काव्यानुशासनविवेक. Cf. छायोपजीवी पदकोपजीवी पादोपजीवी सकलोपजीवी । भवेदथ प्राप्तकवित्वजीवी स्वोन्मेषतो वा भुवनोपजीव्यः ॥ कविकण्ठाभरण, संधि II. दुराकृष्ट is quoted in कविकण्ठाभरण by Kṣemendra.] ll. 7-12. Here the words शिलीमुखम् and किंकिरातान् having two meanings are plagiarised in the second verse मा गाः पान्थ etc. ll. 13-19. An example of borrowing of a part of a द्व्यर्थ word in the same sense is given in these two verses. The second line २७

of the first verse has two meanings. The first is: how one who favours low class people can make use of me. The second is: how one without hunger can make use of the mutton. These two meanings are made possible from the combination of the word मां and the letter सो (मांसोपयोगम्=मां सोपयोगम्। क्षुत् रहितः=क्षुद्रहितः।). From this combination, a part मां is borrowed by another poet in the next verse and combined with सरसं to express the identical meanings as shown above (मांसरसम्=मां सरसम्।). ll. 20-27. Here the word निरवधीरितम् has two meanings: (1) 'repelled' and (2) 'unlimited spreading'. These two senses are expressed with reference to (1) the army of the Asuras and (2) the fame of Baladeva. The word हल in the first line may be read as बल and the words आसुर and अपारपयोनिधिविस्तृतम् may be connected with that as adjective. The same word निरवधीरितम् and the two other words आकुल and आसुर which also have two meanings owing to श्लेष with reference to the army and fame in the first verse, are borrowed in the next verse which forms an example of यमक and expresses the same sense. Page. 57. ll. 1-4. Here the word कर्णायतेक्षणम् is श्लिष्ट and as such this line bears the following two meanings: (1) the crowd of paramours is behaving for the moment in the same manner as Karṇa and (2) the face of the lady has eyes long up to her ears. The same word कर्णायतेक्षणम् is borrowed in the next verse to supply an answer to the three questions put forth in the same verse. The first two questions are "what does the paramour do in the house of a prostitute and for what time?" The answer is: कर्णायते, क्षणम्. He acts as Karṇa and for a moment. The third question is "what kind of face he looked at?" The answer is कर्णायतेक्षणम् i. e. the eyes of which are long enough to reach the ears. *[l. 6. वरदाय नमो हरये पतति जनो यं etc. occurs as the first verse in वृन्दावनयमककाव्य of मानाङ्क. l. 8. चक्रं दहतारम् (रुद्रटकाव्यालङ्कार. III. 4.)]. ll. 5-10. Rājaśekhara's suggestion that Rudraṭa in his verse चक्रं दहतारम् etc. borrowed words from the Mānāṅka's verse वरदाय नमो हरये etc, makes it probable that the poet Mānāṅka the author of the Vṛndāvanayamakakāvya (printed in the Kāvyasaṅgraha by Jīvānanda Vidyāsāgara) flourished before Rudraṭa (cir. 850-900).

ELEVENTH ADHYĀYA 211 आरं=अरिसंबन्धि । अरं=शीघ्रम् । The prose order of this line may be like this:— राजन् आजौ आरं चक्रं अरं दहता तव खड्गेन हता अरिनारी चकन्द ॥ *[ll. 12-13. विशीर्यति and शीर्यति. Both the Mss have the Parasmaipada while the correct form should be विशीर्यते and शीर्यते । The Mss of the Kāvyānuśāsanaviveka have the Ātmanepada.] ll. 11-19. From the passages नन्विदममुपदेश्यमेव न भवति etc., it appears that in the opinion of Avantisundarī, plagiarisms from earlier authors of higher reputation were considered as much gre- ater offence than ordinary thefts. But she permitted borrowings from inferior authors by those who are superiar in reputation, etc. *[l. 21. स पातु वो यस्य जटाकलापे quoted in सुभाषितावलि (No. 63. कस्यापि). l. 25. स पातु वो यस्य हतावशेषाः attributed to Candraka in सुभाषितावलि (No. 30); also quoted in the commentary of ध्वन्यालोक ll. 6. ] ll. 20-28. Ācāryas think that the borrowing of more than three अश्लिष्ट words in sequence is to be considered as plagiarism. An illustration of this is: स पातु वो यस्य borrowed in the second verse where all the four words occur in the same order as in the first. The two इव words, in the first verse, show the वाक्यार्थोपमा in this verse. This figure is defined by Daṇḍin as एकानेकेवशब्दोत्था वाक्यार्थोपमा द्विधा. Kāvyādarśa. 2-43. Cf. शरैरुत्सैरिवोदीच्यानुद्धरिष्यन् रसानिव । Raghu. 4-66. Page. 58. *[l. 3. इत्युक्तवानुक्तविशेषरम्यम् (किरात. III. 10).] ll. 1-14. Rājaśekhara disagrees with the Ācāryas on this point and thinks that any word used in a special expression in an earlier poem, should not be borrowed by later poets; even a pāda or one fourth of a metre consisting of one or two words which can be readily recognized as the compositionof an earlier writer, should be considered as an instance of plagiarism. इत्युक्तवानुक्तविशेषरम्यम् occu- rring in these two verses, is an example of the second kind, while शङ्करक्षीरसिन्धवे is an instance of the first kind. Here, the figure of

212 EXPLANATORY NOTES speech known as रूपक applies to both शङ्कर and क्षीरसिन्धु which have several adjectives each with two meanings. This is the special feature of a particular poet. The same idea finds expression in the work of a later poet in the second verse, though only one word शङ्करक्षीरसिन्धवे is borrowed from the former verse. The reading नाप्रत्यभिज्ञायातः as found in the A and B MSS, however, gives quite a different meaning, and this is almost diametrically oppo- site to the meaning given above. According to this the sentence should be construed as :— अप्रत्यभिज्ञायातः पादोऽपि न परिहरणीयः । तस्यापि साम्ये न किञ्चन दुष्टं स्यात् । That being the case, the pāda इत्युक्तवान् etc, is not to be considered as an instance of actual borrowing. The reading of the C. MS, is adopted here because of the context in which Rāja- śekhara particularly refutes the view of the Ācāryas who maintain that for the purposes of plagiarism the number of words should be more than three. It may be noted here that the pāda इत्युक्तवान् etc. has only three words and according to the Ācāryas this is not an example of plagiarism. But Rājaśekhara thinks that this also is to be avoided. ll. 15–25. Here also Rājaśekhara rejects the view held by the Ācāryas. The line may be construed as अन्यथात्वकरणकारणं पादः नैव हरणम् । अपि तु स्वीकरणम् । The same pāda त्यागो हि सर्वव्यसनानि हन्ति used in the first verse in praise of त्याग is quoted in the next verse in order to denounce it. The verse त्यागो हि सर्वव्यसनानि हन्तीत्यलीकमेतत्. etc is attributed to S'ūdraka in the Subhāṣitāvali but it cannot be traced to his Mṛcchakaṭika. The Ācāryas hold that this is not an example of plagiarism, but only an adaptation of a pāda from an earlier verse by a later writer. Rājaśekhara's view is that such adaptations without acknowledgment also are to be avoided. Page. 59. ll. 1–6. Rājaśekhara exemplifies here another instance of plagiarism. Here, out of the two halves of the verse, the first half पादस्ते नरवर etc, is taken over bodily and the second is changed by a later writer. सीवनी=a line connecting the scrotum and anus. *[ l. 8. तत्तावदेव attributed to प्रकाशदत्त । l. 17. अरण्ये निर्जने, Subhāṣitāvali (No. 555). ]

ELEVENTH ADHYĀYA 218 ll. 16-23. These are instances where later writers have borrowed the same verse composed by earlier authors after changing only one pāda which may either be the 3rd or 4th. This also comes under the list of borrowings. The verse अरण्ये निर्जने etc. is quoted from the Nāradasmṛti, 2. 30. For साहस. cf. सहसा क्रियते कर्म यत्किञ्चिद्बलदर्पितैः । तत्साहसमिति प्रोक्तं सहो बलमिहोच्यते ॥ मनुष्यमारणं स्तेयं परदाराभिमर्शनम्। पारुष्यं द्विविधं ज्ञेयं साहसं च चतुर्विधम् ॥ Nāradasmṛti. 14, 1-2. Page. 60. *[ l. 9. कुमुदवनमपश्रि. ( माघ. XI. 64 ). ] ll. 1-16. In striking contrast to the above citations of plagiarisms, Rājaśekhara treats of here one peculiar case which he considers as original even though there is promiscuous borrowing. In the fourth verse, three pādas are taken from three different verses mentioned above and are connected with one pāda which alone is composed by the author. *[ l. 18. या व्यापारवती. ध्वन्यालोक III. आनन्दवर्धन says that the verse is his own. For अन्यथाकरण of पद and पाद, cf. अपरे पुनः पठितिमन्यथा कथयन्ति ॥ पदपादार्धभाषामान्यथाकरणेन यः । पाठः पूर्वेक्तसूक्तस्य पठितिं तां प्रचक्षते ॥ तत्र पदान्यथाकरणं द्विधा —प्रकृतितो विभक्तितश्च ॥ तत्र प्रकृतितो यथा— असकलहसितत्वात् क्षालितानीव कान्त्या मुकुलितनयनत्वाद्व्यक्तकर्णोत्पलानि । पिबतु(ति)मधुसुगन्धीन्याननानि प्रियाणां त्वयि विनिहितभारः कुन्तलानामधीशः ॥ अत्र त्वयीत्यस्य स्थाने यदा मयीति पठ्यते तदैतत्प्रार्थनावाक्यमपि अनुमतिवाक्यं भवति ॥ पादान्यथाकरणत्वेन यथा,— एकान्ते विजने रात्रावन्तर्वेश्मनि साहसे । न्यासापह्नवे चैव दिव्या सम्भवति क्रिया ॥

214 EXPLANATORY NOTES अत्र यदा तृतीयपादस्थाने तन्वङ्गी यदि लभ्येतेति पाठो भवति तदैतत् परीक्षौपयिकमपि कामौपयिकं भवति ॥ अर्धान्यथाकरणेन यथा,— तत्तावदेव शशिनः स्फुरितं गरीयो यावन्न तिग्मरुचिमण्डलम्अभ्युदेति । अभ्युद्यते सकलधामनिधौ तु तस्मिन् इन्दोः सिताभ्रशकलस्य च को विशेषः ॥ अत्र यदा मध्यमपादयोः स्थाने "यावन्न ताः किमपि गौरतरा हसन्ति । ताभिः पुनर्विहसिता- ननपङ्कजाभिः" इति पठ्यते तदैतद्वीरार्थोक्तिरूपमपि शृङ्गारोक्तिरूपं सम्पद्यते ॥ पादत्रयान्यथाकरणेन यथा,— त्यागेन युक्ता दिवमुत्पतन्ति त्यागेन हीना नरकं व्रजन्ति । न त्यागिनां दुष्करमस्ति किञ्चित् त्यागो हि सर्वव्यसनानि हन्ति ॥ अत्र यदा तुरीयपादमेवादाय पादत्रयान्यथाकरणेन वक्ष्यमाणः पाठो भवति, तदैतत्त्याग- प्रशंसार्थमपि त्यागनिन्दार्थमपि जायते । तद्यथा— त्यागो हि सर्वव्यसनानि हन्तीत्यलीकमेतद्भुवि संप्रतीतम् । जातानि सर्वव्यसनानि तस्यास्त्यागेन मे मुग्धविलोचनायाः ॥ सरस्वतीकण्ठाभरण pp. 80 and 81. ] ll. 17–23. In this verse, another instance of borrowing is illus- trated. Here a later writer makes an attempt to pass off the composition of an earlier author as his own by the substitution of a few words in one pāda. For the explanation of the verse या व्यापारवती etc, see Locana p. 227 on Dhvanyāloka. l. 24. The instance of large scale borrowing of a whole verse belonging to another writer, with slight changes only in parts of the words, is illustrated here. Page. 61. ll. 1–4. The example cited here has an interesting historical background. It appears from this that the great poet Kālidāsa acted as an ambassador of his patron, king Vikramāditya, who may be identified with king Candragupta II of the Gupta dynasty. It also appears probable that Vikramāditya sent Kālidāsa to the court of the king of the Kuntala country as an ambassador. It is also probable that Kālidāsa on his return from the Kuntala king composed a poem recording all the events connected with his mission. This work is known as कुन्तलेश्वरदौत्यम्,

and only three verses from this work are now available. The two verses असकलहसितत्वात् etc. are cited here as an example of पदैकदेशो Funeral, and a third is quoted by Kṣemendra in his Aucityavicāracarcā and these three belong to the work of Kālidāsa's Kuntaleśvaradautya. The conclusions drawn from an analysis of the three verses in question, are given above and the verses are quoted below for ready reference, from the Śṛṅgāraprakāśa of Bhojadeva and the Aucityavicāracarcā of Kṣemendra, along with explanatory notes as found in the respective works. 'अथ नैयायिकी-यत्र पूर्वोक्तमेव वाक्यमर्थान्तरे वक्त्रादिभिरूहयित्वा निवेश्यते तामूहनैयायि- कीमामनन्ति । तद्यथा—कालिदासः 'किं कुन्तलेश्वरः करोति' इति विक्रमादित्येन पृष्टः उक्तवान्— असकलहसितत्वात् क्षालितानीव कान्त्या मुकुलितनयनत्वाद्व्यक्तकर्णोत्पलानि । पिबति मधुसुगन्धीन्याननानि प्रियाणां त्वयि विनिहितभारः कुन्तलानामधीशः ॥ इदमेवोहयित्वा विक्रमादित्यः प्रत्युवाच । पिबति(तु)मधु सुगन्धीन्याननानि प्रियाणां मयि विनिहितभारः कुन्तलानामधीशः ॥ शृङ्गारप्रकाश. प्र. ८ The conversation as quoted above, between Vikramāditya and Kālidāsa regarding the attitude of Kuntaleśvara appears to have been recorded in the work Kuntaleśvaradautya of Kālidāsa from which Bhojadeva seems to have quoted in order to illustrate the ऊहनैयायिकी. This is further supported by a verse quoted from the same work and the explanations thereon given by Kṣemendra. The passage runs thus:— अधिकरणौचित्यं यथा-कुन्तलेश्वरदौत्ये कालिदासः— इह निवसति मेरुः शेखरः क्ष्माधराणां इह विनिहितभाराः सागराः सप्त चान्ये । इदमहिपतिभोगस्तंभविश्राम्यमानं धरणितलमिहैव स्थानमस्मद्विधानाम् ॥ अत्र महाराजदूतोऽपि सामन्तास्थाने स्वप्रभुसमुचितगौरवपूजार्हमासनमनासाद्य कार्यवशेन भूमावेवोपविष्टः प्रागल्भ्यगाम्भीर्येणैवं ब्रूते-यथाऽस्मद्विधानां वसुधातल एव भुजगपतिभोगस्तंभप्राग्भार- निष्कम्पे धरासने स्थानं युक्तम् । यस्मादिहैव मेरुरचलचक्रवर्ती समुपविष्टः । सप्तमहान्धयश्च । तत्तुल्य- तैवास्माकमिति औचित्यमधिकरणपदसंबद्धमेव. p. 139. From this statement of Kṣemendra: महाराजदूतोपि सामन्तास्थाने स्वप्रभुसमुचितगौरवपूजार्हमासनमनासाद्य कार्यवशेन भूमावेवोपविष्टः etc. it may be sur-

216 EXPLANATORY NOTES mised that Kuntaleśvara had secret hostility against his sovereign king Vikramāditya and that Vikramāditya had sent Kālidāsa, his ambassador, to Kuntaleśvara to remove that hostility by establish- ing new bonds of friendship. Kālidāsa became successful in his mission, and made Kuntaleśvara faithful to his overlord king Vikramāditya. This fact, Kālidāsa conveys to his patron through the stanza: असकलहसितत्वात् etc. as stated by Bhoja in the above quotation. The approval: पिबतु मधुसुगन्धीन्याननानि प्रियाणां etc, expressed by Vikramāditya with reference to the request conveyed through Kālidāsa by Kuntaleśvara, shows that Vikrama had established friendly connections with Kuntaleśvara. Now the question arises as to who this Kuntaleśvara is. From the History of the Vākāṭaka Empire (cir. A. D. 284- 550) as given by Mr. K. P. Jayaswal in J. B. O. R. S. vol. XIX. I. II., it may be surmised that Pṛthvīsena I (cir. 348-375 A. D.), who subjugated the king of Kuntala or the Karṇāṭaka country and the Kadamba kingdom, was hostile to the Gupta kings, because Samudragupta defeated and killed his father Vākāṭaka Rudrasena I or Rudradeva I (cir. 344-348 A. D.) who was the reigning sovereign. Samudragupta, however, later re-instated Pṛthvīsena on the vacant throne of his father, as one of the सामन्त kings under the Gupta sovereignty. During the reign of Candragupta II, this Vākāṭaka king Pṛthvīsena gained much power due to his victory over the Kuntala country and the Kadambas. Candragupta who initiated a policy of political marriages with families of subjugated kings, wanted, at that time, to remove the hostile feeling and establish friendship with the Vākāṭaka prince Pṛthvīsena. This idea, very probably, prompted Candragupta to send Kālidāsa as an ambassador to the court of the Vākāṭaka king Pṛthvīsena who was then called Kuntaleśa also due to his victory over the the Kuntala country. We have, however, another testimony for this Gupta Vākāṭaka relation. Prabhāvatī-guptā, the daughter of Candragupta II through the Nāga princess Kubera Nāga, was given in marriage to Vākāṭaka Rudrasena II, (cir. 375-395) the son of Pṛthvīsena I, and her son was Pravarasena II (cir. 405- 435) To this Pravarasena is attributed the Setubandha Kāvya which is generally believed to have been composed by Kālidāsa on behalf of Pravarasena at the request of his patron Vikramāditya Candragupta, the grand-father of Pravarasena II of the Vākāṭaka dynasty.

ELEVENTH ADHYĀYA 217 It may be remembered here that the Rāmasetupradīpa, the commentary on the Setubandha, records an interesting fact in this connection that Kālidāsa composed the Setubandha-Kāvya at the request of Vikramāditya, but published the same under the name of king Pravarasena. The relevent passages from the commentary are quoted below : धीराणां काव्यचर्चाचतुरिमविधये विक्रमादित्यवाचा यं चक्रे कालिदासः कविकुमुदविधुः सेतुनामप्रबन्धम् । etc. इह तावन्महाराजप्रवरसेननिमित्तं महाराजाधिराजविक्रमादित्येनाज्ञप्तः निखिलकविचक्र- चूडामणिः कालिदासमहाशयः सेतुबन्धप्रबन्धं चिकीर्षुः etc. These passages make it abundantly clear that these three persons : Vikramāditya, Kālidāsa and Pravarasena were intimately connected and had some hand in the composition of the Setubandha. It may be suggested here that Kuntaleśvara, mentioned in the verse : असकलहसितत्वात् etc. and referred to by Bhoja and Kṣemendra in their works, must be no other than king Pṛthvīṣeṇa I, of the Vākāṭaka dynasty. Pravarasena, to whom the Setubandha Kāvya is generally attributed, is his grand-son being the son of Rudrasena II and Prabhāvatīguptā, the daughter of Candragupta II. It may be remembered in this connection that both Daṇḍin (Kāvyādarśa, 1-34) and Hemacandra (Book VIII. Grammar) consider the style of the Setubandha as the best available in the Mahārāṣṭrī dialect. These two references, also prove that among the two Pravarasenas of Kashmir none can be the author of this Setubandha because being Kashmirians they are not expected to write excellently in the Mahārāṣṭrī dialect. Another reason for not considering any of the two Pravarasenas of Kashmir as the author of the Setu- bandha, is that they are not contemporaries of either Vikrama or Kālidāsa since they ruled over Kashmir in the first and second centuries A. D. according to the Rājataraṅgiṇī. The Kuntala country being a part of Mahārāṣṭra, the authorship of the Setu- bandha may well be attributed to the Vākāṭaka Pravarasena II, who ruled over this part of the Mahārāṣṭra country in the beginning of the fifth century A. D. as suggested by Mr. K. P. Jayaswal in his 'History of India cir. 150 to 350 A. D.' (J. B. O. R. S. vol. XIX 1933. Pt. I. II.); and General Cunningham (Archaeological Reports Vol. XI. p. 123), and confirmed by Dr. G. Bühler (Indian Antiquary Vol. XII. p. 239). In this case, Pravarasena II of the Vākāṭaka dynasty who ruled over a tract

218 EXPLANATORY NOTES of land to the south of the Narmadā becomes a junior contem- porary of Candragupta Vikramāditya who belonged to the same period, and in whose court poet Kālidāsa flourished as is commonly supposed. Another support for this suggestion regarding the authorship of the Setubandha comes from the Bharatacaritakāvya of Kṛṣṇakavi in which the Setubandha is attributed to the king of Kuntala. The verse in question is: जलाशयस्यान्तरगाढमार्गमलब्धबन्धं गिरिचौर्यवृत्त्या । लोकेष्वलङ्कान्तमपूर्वसेतुं बबन्ध कीर्त्या सह कुन्तलेशः ॥ Trivandrum Series No. 86 (1. 4) Under these circumstances, it is possible that Pravarasena II ruled over the two countries Vidarbha and Kuntala in the beginning of the fifth century A. D. The verse : असकलहसितत्वात् etc., the original of Kālidāsa is borrowed with slight modifications in two words पिबति and त्वयि as पिबतु and मयि by Vikramāditya in order to provide an answer to the request of Kuntaleśvara conveyed through Kālidāsa. *[ l. 6. सुभ्रू त्वं कुपिते. attributed to विद्यापति. Cf. स्वरेण (पठितिः) यथा सुभ्रूः etc. अत्र दृष्टे इत्यत्र प्लुतस्वरकरणात् कुपितकान्ताप्रसादनपरमपीदं वाक्यमुत्कुपितदृष्टि- प्रसादनपरतां प्रतिपद्यते । सरस्वतीकण्ठाभरण. II ] ll. 23-26. Cf. सन्ति श्वान इवासंख्या जातिभाजो गृहे गृहे । उत्पादका न बहवः कवयः शरभा इव ॥ अन्यवर्णपरावृत्त्या बन्धचिह्ननिगूहनैः । अनाख्यातः सतां मध्ये कविश्चौरो विभाव्यते ॥ Harṣacarita 1. 6-7. Adhyāya XII. Page. 62. *[ l. 10 वाक्पतिराज the author of the Gauḍavadha. Cf. दृष्ट्वा वाक्पतिराजस्य शक्तिं गौडवधोद्धुराम् । बुद्धिः साध्वसरुद्वेव वाचं न प्रतिपद्यते ॥ तिलकमञ्जरी. 31. सामन्तजन्माऽपि कवीश्वराणां महत्तमो वाक्पतिराजसूरिः । यः स्थापयाप्यन्यमपीडयच्छ्रुतागदम्यर्थमनन्यदृष्टम् ॥ ( ? ) उदयसुन्दरी ॥ ]

TWELFTH ADHYĀYA 219 ll. 9–12. The views of the Ācāryas and Vākpatirāja, as stated here, are found in the work Gauḍavaho of Vākpatirāja. Cf. कालगुणा पढमकईहिं भमिअमपरिग्गहेसु मग्गेसु । इहरा मईहिं हीरन्ति दुक्करं के वि काणंपि ॥ कत्तो णाम न इंट्ठं सच्चं कविसेविएसु मग्गेसु । सीमन्ते उण सुकब्बि तम्मि सव्वं नवं चेअ ॥ अत्यालोअणतरला इअरकईणं भमन्ति बुद्धीओ । अत्यञ्चेश्र निरारंभमेन्ति हिअअं कइन्दाणम् ॥ आसंसारं कहपुंगवेहिं तद्दिअहगहिअसारो वि । अज्ज वि अभिण्णमुद्दो व्व जअइ वाआपारप्फन्दो ॥ Gauḍavaho-84-87. Here, it may be noted that the last verse of Vākpatirāja आसंसारं etc. has been sanskritized by Rājaśekhara with a few changes and quoted under his name. ll. 13–16. The views of some thinkers regarding the necessity of a careful study of the early poetical works on the part of a poet, are to be linked with the view of the Ācāryas on the point, and not with that of Vākpatirāja above stated. ll. 17–24. Rājaśekhara disagrees with the views of the other thinkers on this subject. The explanation given by him is more or less based on the statement made by Vākpatirāja on the same subject in verses 88–92 of his Gauḍavaho. The views expressed by Vākpatirāja and quoted by Rājaśekhara are already mentioned by Ānandavardhana in his Dhvanyāloka. Cf. वाचस्पतिसहस्राणां सहस्रैरपि यत्नतः । निबद्धाऽपि क्षयं नैति प्रकृतिर्जगतामिव ॥ इयं काव्यस्थितिरनन्ताभिः कविमतिभिरुपभुक्ताऽपि नेदानीं परिहीयते । प्रत्युत नवनवाभिव्यु- त्पत्तिभिः परिवर्धते । and संवादास्तु भवन्त्येव बाहुल्येन सुमेधसाम् । स्थितं ह्येतत् । संवादिन्यो मेधाविनां बुद्धयः । नैकरूपतया सर्वे ते मन्तव्या विपश्चिता ॥ 4,10-11 The statement तदाहुः etc. quoted by Rājaśekhara is traceable in the work of Ānandavardhana with the same context:—