________________
878
SAHĶDAYĀLOKA Actually in Sā., (pp. 388) under false title 'rāsaka', Bhoja's definition of Kavya
ad. There we read, "āksiptikā'pavarno” and not "āksiptikā'tha varno", which is o retained in the ND. Then, we have “kāvyam vicitrarāgam” in place of Bhoja's "vividha-rāgam”. We do not find any logic in Dr. Raghavan's rejecting 'abhagnatāla' of the ND. and accepting 'paddhatikā' and 'chardanikā'. Actually the writers from Gujarat in those days had a better access to the original mss., thanks to the efforts of king Jaisimhadeva who conquered Malwa and thanks to Ācārya Hemacandra for whom the king either collected mss. not only from Bhoja's library but also from different parts of India or got them copied. Dr. Kulkarni V.M., my guru has successfully reconstructed the lost portion of A.bh. on NS. VII, the Bhāvádhyāya, and many readings from H.'s Viveka have been accepted in the critical editions of the Abh. on NS. VI. (The rasa-sūtra portion) by eminent editors such as Gnoli, Masson & Patwardhan and the rest. So, readings from authors fr the land of Gujarat seem to be more reliable. In that case, accepting two readings as correct and rejecting the third for no reason is not logical on the part of Dr. Raghavan. On the contrary we would accept the ND. readings and correct the text as read both in Bhoja's Śr. Pra, and the B.P. of Sā. Even in the SD. we can emend the text as “khandamātrā-dvipadikā - 'bhagnatālaiḥ alamkstam." sāradātanaya defines kävya (BP. IX. 28, pp. 384, Edn. Agrawal, ibid) as :
“kāvyam sa-hāsya-śộngāram sarva-vștti-samanvitam, sa-bhagnatāla-dvipadi khanda-mātrā-pariskrtam. garbhávamarśa-sandhibhyām hīnam, ekánkam eva ca. kvacil lāsyayutam vā syāt vița-ceți-samanvitam. kulanganāveśa-yutam lalitódātta-nāyakam evam prakalpayet kāvyam
tad gauda-vijayo yathā.” Before we explain this, it is clear from the face of it that "kāvya' is, no doubt, 'nāțya, as stated by Abhinavagupta, though with song and music as
Jain Education International
For Personal & Private Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
