________________
INTRODUCTION
Varna Vṛttas, like the author of the Jandirayi. Jayadeva, who very closely follows Pingala, introduces the classification at the commencement of the Varna Vṛttas in the fifth Adhyaya like Pingala, yet he adds the word anustubhi in his definition of Samānī, with the result that by implication, it is applicable even to the other two classes, namely, Pramāņi and Vitana. In all other respects Jayadeva follows Pingala. It is, therefore, possible that sometimes between the days of Pingala and Jayadeva, the division had come to be restricted to the Sama Catuspadį Varna Vṛttas of the Anustubh class only. In that case, the proper place for introducing this classification would have been after the Visama and Ardha-sama Varna Vṛttas, and before the Sama Varna Vrttas, i. e., at the commencement of the sixth Adhyaya as has been done by the author of the Ratnamañjāṣā. But Jayadeva did not do so in his desire to follow closely Pingala's work, with the result that the classification becomes applicable only to the Vaktra class of Visama Vṛttas which belong to the Anustubh class, as has been shown by his commentator Harsata (anustubhi iti vartate a padacaturürdhvät). There is however, no point in this, since, owing to the freedom allowed in the choice. of short and long letters in the constitution of the Pädas of the metres of this i. e., the Vaktra class, all metres of this group are bound to be of the Vitäna type and there would be no scope for either Samani or Pramaņl types among them.
12
10. The name Vitäna calls for a few remarks; according to the four old authors, namely, Pingala, Jayadeva, and the authors of the Janasrayi and the Ratnamañjüş, the word signifies a class of metres and not an individual metre. But Kedara, Jayakirti, Hemacandra and the author of the Kavidarpana treat the word All of Vitäna as if it were a proper name of a particular metre. them define Vitäna as a metre of the Anustubh class which is other than those actually defined by them under that class. Now, Kedara has defined only 6 metres of this class, and so according to him all the other 5 additional ones defined by Jayakirti and the 9 additional ones defined by Hemacandra shall have to be called by the name Vitana. This would make the signification of the word undefined and uncertain. It is curious that Jayadeva does not define Vitäna among the metres of the Anustubh class, obviously because, as we saw above he thought it was the name of a class of metres along with Samānī and Pramāņi. The trouble seems to have started with Halayudha, the commentator of
Jain Education International
For Personal & Private Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
