________________
190
THE INDIAN ANTIQUARY
[DECEMBER, 1916
Sarvananda, and the passage in question is found in the ortion already come out of press. On page 147 of the first part of that publication we find
"Porr Tyret URTA : AUT UT 4+4=rai T alata: 1 मास्मसास्कर्तुमुदयनस्य पद्मावतीपरिणयार्थशजारः । तृतीयः स्वमवासवदते तस्यैव वासवदत्तापरिणयः
TAUFIT: 11"
Whonce, then, has the editor got the version which he has quoted in his introiluction to the Surepna va savulalla? Taking existing MSS. of ?'ikusarvasvu to be imperfect here, the eclitor has cited what he has supposed to be the correct reading of tho j'assage. This is proval by his foot-noto on the passago in his publication of the ? 'ikâsarvasva -
FTC FTATET I ATENT" "fa 93: Fara" All this has been done because Mr. Ganapati Sastri considers that the drama called Svapnava savadatta is no other than the ono published by hi:1. I, on the contrary, suppose that the Srapnavâsavadalla quoted by Sarvånanda is an entirely different work and has for its plot Visavacatti's, and not Paclmivati's, marriage with Udayana.
(2) My supposition is strengthened by another reference to the Swapnavâsavndalla. It is in Abhinavagupta's Lochana on tho Dhvanyaloka. Mr. Ganapati Sastri remarks on the reference thus Tho Aryi
" THE 27TÉ 475993 (?)
उद्घान्य सा प्रविष्टा हत्यगृहं मे नृपतनूजा ॥ .. " is quoted in page 152 in the 3rd Udyota of Dhvanyalokalochana as being taken from Svapnavasavadatla. But I should think that this sloka is not from Swapnavâsavadatta, for it is found in none of the three manuscripts of ours. Besides, this bloka apparently signifies the springing up of love for a lady at first sight. It should be either for Vasavadattá or Padmavati. But it could not be for the former, for the troubled thoughts of a lover for his far off Indy appear in this Nataka only long after a happy wedded life; nor could it le for the latter, for, she was offered to Vatsarâja even without his request, at a time when he was much afflicted with thoughts of Vasavadatta. This surely could not be the occasion for describing his love for Padmavati. It is thus seen that this sloka could not find a place in Svapnavâsavadalla. Hence, we could not infer that this was an omission in the readings of some manuscripts owing to the Nataka having ceased from circulation." (Svapna. Intro. pp. XXIII f.)
I cannot but agree with the editor that the verse quoted by Abhinavagupta is a lover's expression of the depth of his love at first beholding his beloved and that there is no room for such an expression in the present Svapnava savadatta. I set aside the editor's assumption, however, that there has been only one Svapnavasavadatta in the whole Sanskrit Literature and that it is identical with the printed one. If there had been, as I suppose, another drama dealing with Udayana's making love to Vasavadatta and if, on the authority of Sarvånanda, its designation must be Svapnavasavadatla, we should have no reason to hesitate to declare that Abhinavagupta took the above Aryá from that drama, for the sloka can find a context in it.
If we consider the significance of the title Svapnavâsavadatta, we at once find that its application to the present drama has a certain amount of irrationality. The event from which a drama derives its name must have an importance; in other words, it should give effect to further development of the plot. In Abhijnana-Sakuntala the ring which is the abhijñana, or the object of recognition, is the central point of the plot of the fourth, fifth
