111. 108 HISTORY OF SANSKRIT POETICS

108 HISTORY OF SANSKRIT POETICS

(e) दएडी (in II. 51 न लिक्वचने भिन्ने न हीनाधिकतापि वा। उपमा- दूषणायालं यत्रोट्वेगो न धीमताम् ।I) refers to लिक्गमेद, वचनभेद, हीनता and भधिकता between उपमान and उपमेय as blemishes in some cases, but not in all, while भामह (II. 39) speaks of seven blemishes in उपमा. But this cannot be made an argument for the priority of भामह. भामह himself says that मेधाविन् enumerated seven उपमादोषड (vide II. 40). So this was an ancient topic. One may rather use this as an argument for Dandin's priority. Dandin names only four1 उपमादोषऽ (II. 51) while मेधावी knows seven and भामह follows the latter. So दएडी was the pioneer. वामन speaks of six उपमादोषs (का. सूत्र IV. 2. 8). The अननिपुरा (346.29) says 'विभक्तिसंज्ञालिद्ञानां यत्रोद्वगो न धीमताम् । संस्यायास्तत्र भिन्नत्वमुपमानोपमेययोः'. It will be noticed that यत्रोद्वेगो न धीमताम् is common to both दएडी and अभनि ०. (f) दएडी says that even the words 'गतोऽस्तमर्को भातीन्दुर्यान्ति वासाय पच्िसः' are certainly good (poetry) in certain circum- stances of time and situation (गतो ... पतिणः। इतीदमपि साध्वेव कालावस्थानिवेदने' II. 244); while भामह says about those words 'are such words poetry ? (Some) designate them वार्ता.' His words may also mean 'such words are bad samples of poetry (गतो ... पच्िरः। इत्येवमादि किं काव्यं वार्तामेनां प्रचक्षते॥ II. 87). Prof. Rangacharya and Mr. Trivedi rely on this as proving Bhamaha's priority. But the words इत्ये ... चक्षते2 show that भामह is quoting these words as an example of वार्ता given by others and these words are not his own composition (compare the use of the words इतीदमपि of दगडी in connection with लिम्पतीव). Now वार्ता is a figure of speech illustrated by भटि (X. 45) according to जयमला. The विष्युधर्मोत्तर 14. 11 defines वार्ता (in one ms .; vide above p. 71). Dandin seems to

1. भामह(II. 38) finds fault with those who give several varieties of उपमा such as मालोपमा and states that such details are useless (मालोपमादि सर्वोपि न ज्यायान् विस्तरो मुधा). It is not in accordance with his own principles to have given instances of उपमादोषs and to have explained them in detail (as in II.40-64) when मेधावी had already named the seven उपमादोषs and had exemplified them, as shown by नमिसाधु on रुद्रट XI. 24. 2. भामह frequently employs the verb प्रचक्षते for stating others' views. Vide II. 93 (about स्वभावोक्ति), IV. 12 (about एकार्थ), VI. 16 (about अपोह).