________________
"पद्यं चतुष्पदी तच्च वृत्तं जातिरिति द्विधा ।
छन्दोविचित्यां सकलस्तत्प्रपञ्चो निरूपितः ॥" in the KävyĀdarga. Here the absence of expressions like 491 makes it difficult to take this as meaning a work by himself. Moreover we find the mention of Chhandoviciti in earlier works like the Arthasāstra of Kantalya and Dharmasūtra of A pastamba, and so the work referred to, if at all any specific work is meant mast be the Chhandassāstra of Piugalanāga.
A third view is that Kalăpariccheda mentioned in the Kávyādarša in the verse,
"इत्थं कलाचतुष्पष्टिविरोधः साधु नीयताम् ।
तस्याः कलापरिच्छेदे रूपमाविर्भविष्यति ॥" is the other work of Dandin. This view also is not correct; because, terms like afzena, spre, ger, faax etc. are generally used to denote only sections of works and not the names of the works themselves. Moreover, in his commentary on Bhavabhūti's Mälatimādbava, Jagaddhara bas cited certain verses as from the Kávyādarsa bat which are not found in the printed editions of the work. So also are come verses cited in Jayamangalā, the commentary on Kāmasūtra. As for instance,
"दंष्ट्राग्रा प्राग् यो द्राक् मामम्वन्तःस्थामुच्चिक्षेप । देवध्रुक्षिद्ध्यत्विकस्तुत्यो युष्मान् मोऽव्यात् सपात्कतुः ॥"
while explaining the art called दुवाचकयोगाः and 'आश्वासं जनयति राजमुख्यमध्ये'etc., while explaining the art called काव्यसमस्यापूरणम्. These instances sbow that at the time when Jayamangalā was written, there was a section in the Kavyādarsa dealing
