वासवदत्ता (महाकवि सुबन्धु - श्लेष-प्रधान शास्त्रीय गद्यकाव्य सान्वय सटीक)

16 VĀSAVADATTĀ of discrimination........ Therefore the kathā (and) ākhyāyikā are one category marked with a double name ; and here, too, will be comprised the other categories of stories.' ¹ In support of this statement of Daṇḍin, it may be noted that the Vāsavadattā, though termed, as we have seen, an ākhyāyikā lacks the necessary divisions into 'sighs' ; in its opening stanzas it (like a kathā) describes 'the character of knaves and the like' (introductory stanzas 6–9) ; and it contains a long episode spoken by another than the hero—the conversation of the maina with his mate concerning the heroine of the story. The manifest resem- blance of the Vāsavadattā to the Kādambarī, which is considered to be a kathā, together with its unlikeness to the Harṣacarita, whose technique it should share, were it really an ākhyāyikā, also serves to confirm the views of Daṇḍin rather than those of the Sāhityadarpaṇa. One need have little hesitation, therefore, in regarding the Vāsavadattā as technically a kathā.² The 'Style' and Rhetorical Embellishments of the Vāsava- dattā. The rīti, or 'style,' of the Vāsavadattā is the Gāuḍī, which the Sāhityadarpaṇa (No. 627) defines as follows (cf., in general, Regnaud, Rhétorique sanskrite, pp. 253–255, Paris, 1884): ōjaḥprakāśakāir varṇāir bandha āḍambaraḥ punaḥ samāsabahulā gāuḍī, 'the Gāuḍī, moreover, is a resonant arrangement (of words) with sounds expressing strength, (and) abounds in compounds.' Vā- mana, in his Kāvyālaṁkāravṛtti (1. 2. 12), describes this 'style' as 'consisting of strength (ōjas) and grace (kānti)', while avoiding 'sweetness' (mādhurya) and 'softness' (sāukumārya). Accord- ing to the Kāvyādarśa (1. 44a, 46a, 54a, 92a), moreover, the Gāuḍī especially affects alliteration, etymologising, and hyper- bole.³ When it is added that, as the Kāvyādarśa (1. 14–29) also ¹ It may be mentioned in passing that Ānandavardhana's Dhvanyālōka, 3. 8 (tr. Jacobi, in ZDMG. 56. 789), states that compound words are longer in the ākhyāyikā than in the kathā. ² I am glad to note that my conclusion in this respect is confirmed by Krishna- machariar (Introd., pp. 8–9). ³ Krishnamachariar (Introd., pp. 28–29) notes the prevalence in the Vāsavadattā