Paumchariu Part 1

SR No.: 002523
Original Sutra Author: Swayambhudev
Author: H C Bhayani
Publisher: ZZZ Unknown
Publication Year: 1953
Total Pages: 458
Language: Sanskrit, English
Classification: Book_Devnagari & Literature
File Size: 11 MB

Page 67

26
PAUMACARIU
udástea. Atravam. tad umilahu' itlabhasta.
occupy a space of some 24 sides or 12 folios. Thus of the missing 22 folios of SC., about 10 dealt with from the Uktā to the Jagats and part of the Atijagati classes of the Varņavrttas, while the twelve folios preceding them could have well contained the metres of the Āryā, Galitaka and Khãnjaka classes.
Fortunately there are some positive indications' to believe that Svayambhū did treat the genuine Pk. metres. In the commentary on the fourth stanza (īsīsi cumbiaim etc.) Act I of the Abhijñānasākuntala, Rāghavabhatta, while explaining the metre of the stanza makes the following remarks:
iyam ca Gītiḥ. Tallakṣaṇam Sambhau- 'caccaravadha-addhe
udāsthaddhammi na visame masta guru sattaddha Giiaddhe'. Atra pūrvārdhe pūrvayor imkāra-hiņkārayor laghutvam jñeyam. tad uktar tatraiva- 'iha ārābindu
juāe osuddhā- paā vasāņaṁ milahu' iti, Here two quotations are given by Rāghavabhatta. The first is hopelessly corrupt. Ercepting the last two syllables Gii all the rest. of the text of that quotation is printed in one mass without any word division in the original. It is not possible to make out from this the original wording or sense, but it is given with the express statement that this is a definition of the metre Gīti quoted from one Sambhu. The second quotation too is somewhat corrupt. Its correct form is as under:
iha(i)-ārā bindu-juā, e-o suddhā paāvasāņammi lahu.
In the commentary on śākuntala V 16 also occurs, 'e-o suddhā paāvasānammi lahu'. These latter two quotations are given to support the metrically short character of final in and hiṁ in a Pk. metre. It is clearly stated that the second quotation in the commentary on Sākuntala I 4 is taken from the same source (tatraiva) as the first i.e., from Sambhu according to the text as we have it. Now this second citation is obviously taken from the Svayambhūcchandas of Svayambhū wherein IV 2 reads:
i-hi-ārā bindu-juā paāvasanammi jaha huvanti lahu
taha kattha-vi chanda-vasā käavvă u-hu-ārā i and further IV 3 reads:
binni-vi e-o suddhā paāvasānammi jaha huvanti lahu ll etc. Rāghavabhatta has apparently combined SC. IV 2 and 3 in his citation. But there does not appear any reasonable doubt as to Rāghavabhatta's source. Two results follow from this: first, although the name of the authority is given as Sambhu, it is but a corruption of the correct name Svayambhū; second, Svayambhū had also to his credit the treatment of at least the Aryā class of Prakrit metres.
Svayambhū and Svayambhūcchandas have been quoted by two other late metricians also in the incorrect forms sambhu and sambhucchandas. Nārāyanabhatta in his commentary (1544 A.D.) on Kedārabhatta's Vrttaratnākara' mentions Sambhucchandas along with the Prākṣtapaingala and Cūdāmani as his sources for the information he supplies regarding Prakrit metres*. His words are: Prākstādişu prāyaḥ paridrstäni chandamsi Prak’tapaingala
binni hatta has appanot appearllow from this but a cor also
(1) Bhayani, H.C., 'Svayambhú and the Prakrit Metres', BV, n.s. 8, 9-10, Sept.
Oct. 1946. 137-138. The view expressed in that note has been revised here
on discovering fresh evidence. (2) Published along with Godbole and Parab's edition of the "Sakuntala', Bombay
1889. (3) Parab, 1902 68. (4) Though he states that he had examined the above three works, in the por
tion that follows all the quotations are from the Prákrta-paingala.