145. KĀVYĀLANKĀRASŪTRA OF VĀMANA 143

KĀVYĀLANKĀRASŪTRA OF VĀMANA 143

verse of भ. सु. क. are not to be taken too literally. सुबन्धु did not literally escape from the prison of बिन्दुसार as some suppose; what is meant is that the story of बत्सराज captivated सुबन्धु's heart and that सुबन्धु did not become subservient to बिन्दुसार, but made the latter serve his own purpose and reduced बिन्दुसार to the position of a spectator. This, therefore, is probably a reference to वासवदत्तानाव्यधारा and the नाट्यायित therein mentioned by अभिनवगुप्त (p. 178 of G.O.S. ed. vol. III of भ. भा.). To me it appears that what Vamana wrote was most likely वसुबन्धुसाचिव्यो०. The reading च सुबनधु० does not convey the force of च. What does च connect? As time passed by, वसुबन्धु, a Buddhist writer, came to be for- gotten and as grry became more known the scribes either read वसुबन्धु as 'च सुबनधु' or purposely read so in order to make the passage refer to a well-known author. The mere fact (on which M.M. Haraprasad Shastri relies) that many mss. read च सुबन्धु is not enough. Most of these mss. are later by several centuries than Vamana. If there had been not a single ms. giving the reading बसुबन्धु, the matter would have been different. Among the works quoted from, though not actually named, are the अमरुशतक, उत्तरराम० (इयं गेहे लक्षमी: on IV. 3.6), 1कादम्बरी, किरातार्जुनीय, कुमारसम्भव, मालतीमाधन, मृच्छकटिक (धृतं दि नाम पुरुषस्यासिंहासनं राज्यं on IV. 3. 23), मेघदूत, रघुवंश, विक्रमोवशीय, वेणीसंहार, शाकुन्तल, शिशुपालवध, हर्षचरित. The verse यासां बलि: (on V.1.3) occurs in the मृच्छकटिक (I.9) as well as in the चारुदत्त ([. 2) ascribed to भास. The words 'यो भर्त- पिएडस्य कृते न युध्येत्' (cited as an ungrammatical प्रयोग on V. 2.13) occur in कौटिल्य's भर्थशाख and in the प्रतिज्ञायगन्धरायण (IV.3). The verse 'शरच्छशाङ्कगौरेय वाताविद्धन भामिनि। काशपुष्पलवेनेदं साश्रुपातं मुखं कृतम्।।' cited as an example of व्याजोकि ([V. 3. 25) occurs with slight variations in the स्वप्नवासवदत्ता (IV. 8) ascribed to भास. The words मातकं मानभहूरं on वामन V. 2. 38 seem to be a misreading taken from भामह 'मदो जनयति प्रीति सानऊं मानमकुरम्' II. 27. He refers to the view of other writers on अलक्कार : उत्प्रेक्षैवातिशयोक्तिरिति केचित (IV.3.10); अर्थान्तरन्यासस्य हेतुरूपत्वाद्धेतोश्चान्वयव्यतिरेकात्मकत्वान्न ततः पृथग् व्यतिरेक इति केचित IV. 3. 21; उपमानाधिक्यात्तदपोह इत्येके-IV. 2. 18; 'अनयोर्दोषयोविंपर्ययाख्यस्य दोषस्यान्तर्मावान्न पृथगुपादानम्। अत एवास्माकं मते षड् दोषा इति' on IV. 2.11 (this seems to refer to मेषाविन् or to भामह II.39). He often says शरोकाश्चात्र भवन्ति (which are probably quota-

1 On सूत्र V. 2. 44 वामन' वृत्ति is 'अनुकरोति भगवतो नारायणस्य इत्यत्रापि मन्ये स्मशब्द: कविना प्रयुक्तो लेखकैस्तु प्रमादान्न लिखित इति'.