149. KĀVYĀLANKĀRASŪTRA OF VĀMANA 147

KĀVYĀLANKĀRASŪTRA OF VĀMANA 147

word 'पक्तमालीपिङ्गलिम्नः' (on V.2. 18) from the मालतीमाधव. भवभूति flourished at some time between 700 and 740 A.D. (vide Dr. Bhandarkar's preface to the मालतीमाधव pp. XIII-XVII ed. of 1905 and Smith in JRAS 1908 p. 793). Therefore, वामन is later than 750 A. D. The राजतर हिखी says that a वामन was a minister of king जयापीढ 'मनोरथः शङ्गदत्तश्चटकः सन्धिमांस्तथा। वभूवुः कवयस्तस्य वामनाधाश्च मन्त्रिय:।।' (IV. 497). Buhler (Kashmir report p. 65) is inclined to give credence to the tradition of the Kashmirian pandits that minister Vamana whom जयापीढ employed was the author of the काव्यालङ्का रसूत्र. If this were accepted it must lead to the result that Vamana flourished about 800 A. D. and was a contempcrary and probably a rival of 3z. It is remarkable that neither of them refers to the other. There is another way of arriving at the same date for वामन. Hequotes some verses from माघ viz. उमौ यदि (शिशु III. 8 on IV 3.10), सितं सितिम्ना (शिशु. I.25 on V. 2. 9) and refers to खलूक्त्वा खलु वाचिकम् (शिशु. II. 70) in the sutra 'न पादादौ खल्वादयः' (V. 1. 5). माघ refers to न्यास, वृत्ति and महाभाष्य in 'अनुत्सत्रपदन्यासा सद्वृत्तिः सन्निबन्धना' (शिशु० II. 112). It has been shown above (p. 118) that the न्यास cannot be earlier than 700 A.D. and that माघ is praised by नृपतुङ्न. So माघ flourished about 725-775. The author of काव्या० सूत्र cannot be identified with वामन, one of the authors of the काशिका, that was composed about 660 A.D. It is worthy of note that वामन holds the same views as the काशिका on certain grammatical points. For example, on the सूत्र 'ब्रह्मादिषु हन्तेर्नियमादरिहाद्यसिद्धिः' (काव्या० सूत्र V. 2.35) वामन says ब्रह्मादिष्वेव, हन्तेरेव, क्विबेव, भूतकाल एवेति चतुविधश्चात्र नियम :; the काशिका on ब्रह्म भ्रूणवृत्रेषु क्विप् (पा. III. 2.27) says the same thing, while the महाभाष्य holds that there is a two-fold नियम only. On 'सुदत्यादयः प्रतिविधेयाः' काव्या० सू० (V.2.68) वामन mentions two ways of explain- ing away words like सुदती, the second of which seems to be the opinion of the काशिका (on 'स्तियां संशायाम्' पा. V. 4. 143). The commentary of गोपेन्द्रतिप्पभूपाल has been published several times. He belongs to the 15th century or is even a little later. He quotes the काव्यप्रकाश, विधाधर, विधानाथ, विदग्धमुखमरडन and other later writers. He quotes a verse in praise of तिप्पभूपाल (on V.1.3). The com. is called कामधेनु. He quotes a भष्टगोपाल who seems to have been a commentator on the काव्यालक्कारसूत्र (on I. 3. 16). The other commentaries are those of महेश्वर (who wrote a commentary styled साहित्यसर्वस्व्र, I. O. cat. p. 321) and of सह्देव.