187. DHVANYĀLOKA 185

DHVANYĀLOKA 185

the Locana which speak of vrttikara adding words by way of upaskāra and which are relied upon by some of those who are for non-identity. Nor is it necessary to dwell on the breaking up of kārikās into smaller portions. But one thing is remark- able. If the karikas and vrtti were from the same hand the breaking up of kārikas and interspersing portions of vrtti should have been uniform.1 But even so early as the Locana it was noted that there is no such uniformity in this respect, some mss. of the vrtti reading the kārikas in pieces and others reading them as wholes. Dr. Krishnamoorthy (I. H. Q.vol. 24 p. 300), while trying to explain away the splitting up of kārikās by the example of Mammata, has not said a word about the discrepancy in the mss. noted so early by the Locana as the 10th century A. D.2 I have replied to most of the important points put forward by those who are for identity. It is not possible for restrictions of space to refute cach and every point (however insignificant it may be) made by the opponents of the theory of non-identity. But one or two insignificant matters must be cleared .up. Dr. Krishnamoorthy ridicules3 as absurd my suggestions (I. H. Q. vol. 24 p. 184 n. 17) on p. LX. of the last edition 'The penultimate verse at the end of the 4th उद्योत (काव्याख्ये०) leads one to infer that काव्य formed part of the name of the original work (or was itself its name) on which आनन्दवर्धन commented (probobly it was called काव्यध्वनि or simply काव्य or ध्वनि)'. But Dr. K. himself concedes that the name काव्यध्वनि is possible. I hope he knows that the work is called काव्यालोक as in Dr. De's edition of 4th उद्दोत of

1. On कारिका II. 32-33 the लोचन notes about 'तासामेवालं- कृतीनाम्' (in the वृत्ति) and पुनः also 'तासामेवालङकृतीनामित्ययं पठिष्यमाण- कारिकोपस्कारः। पुनरिति कारिकामध्ये उपस्कार:।; again on IV. 9-10 लोचन says 'शक्तीनामित्यन्ततः कारिकयोमध्योपस्कारः'. 2. On संवादो ह्वन्य० (IV. 12) लोचन remarks : एषा खएडीकृत्य वृत्तौ पठिता; on आात्मनोन्यस्य सद्भावे (IV. 14) the लोचन says 'इति कारिका वृत्तौ खएडीकृत्य पठिता। केषुचित् पुस्तकेषु कारिका अखसिडता एव दृश्यन्ते।' (J. of Dept. of Letters, Cal. Un. vol. IX. at p. 39). Kārikā IV. 16 also was split up by some according to the लोचन. 3. The learned Doctor remarks 'It is nothing short of absurd to urge seriously that a work on literary criticism was itself designated as kāvya or dhvani'.