________________
Addendum
P. 1 : Sanskrit Writers on Plagiarism : Almost simultaneously with the publication
of this paper in the Journal of the Oriental Institute, Baroda, the paper, Plagiarism-Its Varieties And Limits by C. R. Devadhar, was published in the
Annals (B. O. R. Institute) Vol. XXXV, Poona, 1955. P. 7,L.2 : In the course of his commentary on Sarasvatikanthabharana II. 39, thec om(from below) mentator Ratnesvara speaks of five kinds of derivative poems : 1. Prakrti
parināma 2 Parapurapravesa 3 Khandasamghātya 4 Calikā and 5 Parimala. He explains and illustrates all these five kinds of derivative poems. He explains and illustrates 'Parapurapravesa' kind of poem as follows : भाषामात्रभिन्नः परपुरप्रवेशः । यथादेवाधिपो वा भुजगाधिपो वा घराधिपो वा यदि हैहयः स्याम् । संदर्शनं ते गुणकीर्तन ते सेवाञ्जलिं ते तदहं विदध्याम् ॥ यथा चसविमो अणज्जुणमिमं अमहिंदमवासुइंच अप्पाणं । सेवंजलि-दंसण-गुण-कहासु तुह जो ण पज्जत्तो ॥ [शपामहे अनर्जुनमिमम् अमहेन्द्रम् अवासुकिं चात्मानम् । सेवाअलि-दर्शन-गुणकथासु तव यो न पर्याप्तः ॥] अत्र भाषामात्रं भिन्नमिति परपुरप्रवेशनामायं योनिजकाव्यभेदः ।
-सरस्वतीकण्ठाभरणम् (पृ. १६३), काव्यमाला ९४, १९३४ In the above passage the first verse is in Sanskrit whereas the second one, in
(Maharashri)Prakrit. But the idea expressed in both the verses is the same. P. 18 : In the context-that the thought is a common property of all of us-the two
passages, one from Jayanta's Nyayamalijari and the other from Hemacandra's.
Pramānamimamsa, cited in foot-note no. 2 on p. 24 infra, are apposite. P. 19 : The paper, with a few changes, is now included, as an Appendix, in these f. n.no.3 Studies. PP. 78-108 : 'The Conception of Sandhis In the Sanskrit Drama' mainly deals with
the theory. Its application by the Sanskrit playwrights in actual practice needs to be examined by a close and truly critical study of some of the Sanskrit
plays and their Sanskrit commentaries. PP.117-122 : The topic of 'grammar in relation to poetry' is intimately connected with
aesthetics. A study of Sanskrit Grammar and Aesthetics-embracing the views
of literary critics (alamkärikas)-by the present writer will soon appear. P. 154, 11 1-4 : In this context the observations of J. L. Masson and M. V. Patwar
dhan deserve our notice :
