________________
175 Cf. K. P. X. 93 and X-100-101 for Rūpaka and Atiśayokti
(their connection and distinction). 176 Mammața's def. of Prativastūpamā (K.P. X. 101) excludes
Nidarśanā and Dşşțāñta. 177 Hemachandra combines Paryāya and Parivịtti. Prof. R. B.
Athavale indicts him for doing so. (K. A. S., Vol. II,
p. 224). 178 Vide Dr. R. S. Betais paper (f. n. 175) 179 Dandin sets out the supremacy of Svabhāvokti in
Literature. Hemachandra uses Dandin's phraseology (VI. 15). Mammața stresses action or form inherent in one's nature (Sp. a child etc.). For Bhamaha (11. 93) it is natural description. But Kuntaka (V. I. 1.11-15) opposes it tooth and nail. (vide Dr. S. K. De HSP. Vol. II, p. 187.) Hemachandra refutes Kuntaka's views in the Viveka Commentary under "Jāti' and derives support from
Mahimabhatta's views on Poetic imagination. (Viveka, p. 380) 180 Hemachandra's Smrti, Bhrāntimān and Visama are
interconnected (VI. 24-26) and Samadhi and Samuccaya
combine to form one figure i.e. Samuccaya. 181 Hence Kāvyaling is also dropped (Viveka, p. 397). 182 Samkara and Samspsti represent the combination of
figures. While in the former, the combined figures are not discernible, in the latter they are. The former is a chemical mixture like milk and water, but the latter, is separable mixture like rice and sesamum. Mammața gives
Three but Hemachandra gives four varieties of Samsrsti. 183 Dr. Raghavan traces the beginnings of the two theories
or doctrines of differentiation between figures of word and sense to Rājanaka Tilaka's commentary on Udbhata's KASS. Mammața derived his method (K. P. IX under Śleşa) from it. Tilaka's son Ruyyaka developed his
506
Jain Education International
For Private & Personal Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
