________________
$8 21-23 ] सवृत्तिकः कविदर्पणः
XXXV therein with the obvious intention of ascribing the authorship of these stanzas to Pingala. Thus the words gulha kavi erisa vuttau in CK. 12 are substituted by sesa kai vatthu niruttau at Präkrta Paingala I.107 in an otherwise almost identical stanza. The same may be said about CK, 16, 25 ond 31. These, however, do not contain any name, but appear with the name of Pingala at Prākṣta Paingala II.208, 1.170 and 1.146 respectively (as Faņīndra, Nāgarāja and Sukavibandhu). There are two more stanzas in the Chandaħkośa, namely, 46 and 50, which bear a close verbal similarity with Prākąta Paingala II.69 and 1.44 respectively; but in this case, the latter has not introduced Pingala's name in either of them. At any rate this comparison of the two slightly different forms in which the same stanza appears in the two works in the above mentioned six instances must lead us to the inference that these stanzas were not originally composed by either Ratnasekhara or the author of the Prākrta Paingala, but that they were borrowed from an earlier work (perhaps only with the help of their memory), by both. For, if Ratnasekhara had borrowed them from the Praksta Paingala, he would certainly not have dropped Pingala's name from them, or substituted Gulha's name for it, and this is perfectly clear from the other stanzas in the Chandaḥkośa, which contain the names of Arjuna and Gosala. Ratnasekhara had no ambition of being called an , original authority on Prakrit prosody and so he did not introduce his name anywhere in his definitions. The author of the Prāksta Paingala, on the other hand, wanted to lend authority to his composition by ascribing it to the famous originator of Prosody.
23. Ratnasekhara's treatment of the Prakrit and Apabhramśa metres is not very methodical. Among the Prakrit metres he defines only the Gāthā (in vv. 51-54), with its varieties like Pathyā and its derivatives like Gīti and others (in vv. 55-66). He mentions the 26 varieties of Gāthā, together with their names, as also the 4 varieties which bear the names of the four castes and also the other main varieties, namely, Pathyā, Vipulā and Capalā. In vv. 67-70, he defines in succession Vigāthā22, Giti, Upagīti and Skandhaka, while in 'vv. 71-73 he merely explains the method of finding out the number of short or long letters in a given stanza of a particular metre. In this connection Ratnasekhara mentions an interesting equation according to which ths of a Mātrā is equivalent to a Yoni. This measure, namely, Yoni, is mentioned by him in v. 30 in a casual manner;
22. This is the same as the Udgiti of the Sanskrit writers like Pingala and his
followers; but the name Vigāthā, which is possibly the clder one, is found even at Nanditādhya, Gāthālakṣaṇa v. 62 and Prāksta Paingala 1.66.
