________________
Prakrit Verses in Sanskrit Works on Poetics
605 51. This gātha is already dealt with; vide ŚP S.No. (92.59), SK S.No. (6.340) supra.
Bhoja cites this găthă as an example of the defect '31954. - Hemacandra calls this defect as अक्रम (K p. 264); and Narendraprabha Gosh (p. 156). Bhoja thus adds a gloss on the gātha : 377 gechaunts To SC FGH 3742544 1 - fraait 9. 38. Narendraprabha's gloss is : 37 Tramp chita , uw faceta:
- Ļ. 94€.
52. This găthā is already dealt with; vide DHV S.No. (14.8) supra. Narendraprabha
cites this gāthā as an example of 37efraktshalat saat 64GRRRT (UMCO)
53. This stanza is already dealt with; vide SK S.No. (369.414); Hemacandra's KĀŚ
S.No. (52.488) supra.
Narendraprabha follows Hemacandra and cites this stanza as an example where the (poetic) defect - grāmyatva (lokamātra-prasiddhatva) turns into (poetic) quality. His gloss on the stanza, 377 lagoonticare chetip-HENGETEGHI ARU JUCATI (9.909), strongly reminds us of Hemacandra's gloss (KĀS, p. 227,1 16).
54. This stanza is already dealt with; vide KP S.No. (44.429) supra. Mammata in
his KP (pp 467-68) observes that the figure of word is based on word (and the figure does not at all help the production or manifestation of rasa) Narendraprabha similarly observes : "FACT 976 TagArt: spufa, 75 PEMIH 141
- 9.9CC.
55. This gātha is already dealt with; vide VJ S.No. (1.19), ŚP S.No. (41.50) supra.
KP, KĀŚ too cite this gāthā as an example of the figure Atiśayokti (abhede’pi bhedah variety). Narendraprabha follows Hemacandra and observes 3751 लटभत्वादीनामभेदेऽप्यन्यत्वेन भेदः।
56. This gātha is already dealt with; vide No. (684.176); A'sarvasva S.No.
(18.439) supra. Narendraprabha cites this gathā as an example of the figure Atiśayokti (Abhede'pi bhedah variety). He thus comments on it: 35 faouicheta Paula Mig Hafaret:1 - 9. 238.
57. This gātha is already dealt with; vide ŚP S.No. (304.105) and SK S.No.
