________________
Sanskrit Sähityaśāstra
133
(11) F. 50 (a) ॥ 3-5 : These lines are easy to restore with the help of the following passage from KLV17 : किं पुनः कारणं साध्यसाधनोपन्यास उपमाने न क्रियते । मुखमिन्दुरिवेत्यत्रति । एतदुक्त भवति । उपमाने कुत्सितः साध्यसाधनोपन्यासः सहृदयहृदयहरणभ्रंशप्रसङ्गात् । यद्यव क्रियते मुखमिदमाहूलादकर कान्तिविशेषातिशययोगादिन्दुरिवेति तदा क्लिष्ट' काव्य स्यात् । यथेदं वक्ष्यमाणमुदाहरणम् । एतदेव दर्शयति-तदाह इति ।
These numerous passages, which have their source in Udbhata's Commentary on The Kävyālamkāra of Bhāmaha clearly suggest that Bhāmahavivarana itself must have been ready at hand for the author of KLV 18.
Finally, I refer to one passage from KLV which unambiguously corroborates this inference. The author of KLV (pp 70-71) comments at length on Bhāmaha V. 56. In this comment we read : "तदुक्तम्
इवादेरप्रतीतापि शब्दसंस्कारतः क्वचित् ।।
उपमा गम्यतेऽन्यत्र केवलार्थनिबन्धना ॥ इति । यत्त्वत्र विवरणकृता उपमानोपमेयभावविवक्षा साम्यमिवादिप्रयोगश्चेति त्रितयमुद्घोषित तद् बाहुल्याभिप्रायेण न तु लक्षणतया ।......"
Now, the quotation "iväderapratītāpi" etc. is found introduced in his Laghuvștti (p 29, Banhatti's edition) by Pratihārendurāja with the words 'tadāhuh". The author of KLV identifies this quotation as originating from vivaraṇaksi, i. e. Udbhaga, the author of (Bhämaha-) Vivarana and thus indicating that he must have had Bhämahavi varaņa in front of him.
KAMA
But there is one serious difficulty .
making such a surmise. And it is the metre in which the two verses
1. वयसि etc. p. 78) are composed. The quarter, however, unmistakalYTEVENT .. . of Kalidasa (Kumārasam.
bhava, canto v. 4). 17. p. 71 11.9-12. 18. So it was to Hemacandra who quotes st-ne passages from-terror a contrary view, however,
vide Kane's History of Sanskrit Poetics (p. 127, 1951 ed). ..
