194. 192 HISTORY OF SANSKRIT POETICS

192 HISTORY OF SANSKRIT POETICS

relied upon by scholars before I wrote in 1923. The अभिधावृत्ति- मातृका, which was composed about a hundred years earlier than the लोचन, distinctly says that ध्वनि, which had been propounded as a new doctrine by the respected सहृदय, does fall within the sphere of लक्षया 'लक्षणामार्गावगाहित्वं तु पन: सहृवयर्नूतनतयोपर्वणतस्य विद्यत इति दिशमुन्मीलयितुमिदमत्रोक्तम्' p.21. So also on p. 19 मुकुल says 'तथाहि तत्र विवच्ितान्यपरता सहृदर्यः काव्यवत्मनि निरूपिता' This clearly shows that when मुकुल wrote (about 900-925 A.D.) ध्वनि was a new doctrine and that सहृदय propounded it. Similarly, प्रती- हारेन्दुराज, the pupil of मुकुल, says 'ननु यत्र काव्ये सहृदयहृदय ह!दिनः प्रधानभूतस्य स्वशब्दव्यापारास्पृष्टत्वेन प्रतीयमानेकरूपस्यार्थस्य सद्भावस्तत्र तथाविधार्था- भिव्यक्तिहेतुः काव्यजीवितभूतः केश्चित्सहृदयंर्ध्वनिर्नाम व्यअ्ञकत्वभेदात्मा काव्यधर्मो- डभिहित: (p. 79). These passages, particularly the first two, make it very probable that सहृदय was the name of the author who propounded the theory of ध्वनि or (more probably) was the title given to him by his admirers. As to the identity of the author of the karikas with आनन्द- वर्धन, a perplexing difficulty arises. राजशेखर in his काव्यमी0 (p. 16) says 'प्रतिभाव्युत्पत्त्योः प्रतिभा श्रयसी इत्यानन्दः । सा हि कवेरव्युत्पत्तिकृतं दोष- मशेषमाच्छादयति। तत्राह-अ्व्युत्पत्तिकृतो दोषः शकत्या संव्रियते कवेः। यस्त्व- शक्तिकृतस्तस्य भगित्येवावभासते।' (p. 16). The verse quoted as आनुन्द's is a परिकरश्रोक in ध्वo. (p. 179); so by about 900 to 925 A. D.) it was well-known that आनन्दवर्धन was the author of the वृ चति in the ्वo. But this has no bearing on identity. A verse ascribed to राजशेखर in जहष's सूक्तिमुक्तावली (p.46 of G. O. S. ed.) speaks of आनन्दवर्धन as one who established the true essence of poetry by means of (the work) ध्वनि 'ध्वनिनातिगभीरेख काव्यतत्त्वनिवे- शिना। आनन्दवर्धनः कस्य नासीदानन्दवर्धनः॥'. प्रतीहारेन्दुराज, after the passage quoted above about सहृदय, gives it as his opinion that ध्वनि is included among the alankaras and proceeds to examine the threefold division of व्वनि into वस्तु, अलक्कार and रस and tries to show that the examples of these given in the tao are merely examples of अलङ्गार (pp. 79-85). In these pages occur passages which show that he attributed the वृत्ति also to सहृदय; for exa- mple, ('तथाहि प्रतीयमानैकरूपस्य वस्तुत्रैविष्यं तैरुक्तं (तः=सहृदयैः) वस्तुमात्रा- लक्गाररसादिभेदेन तत्र वस्तुमात्रं तावत्प्रतीयते यथा चक्राभिघातप्रसभाशयैव'; vide, ध्व. p. 109 for this illustration; (2) "वाच्यशत्तयाश्रयं (व्यअ्ञकत्वं) तु रसादि- वस्तुमात्रालक्गाराभिव्यक्ति हेतुत्वात्त्रिविधम्। तत्र यत्तावद्वाचकशक्त्याश्रयं व्यङ्यभूताल- क्वरे कनियतं शब्दशक्तिमूलानुरएनरूपव्यअ्ञयतया सह द पेर्व्यञजकत्वमुक्तं 'सर्वेकशरण- मक्षयम्' इत्यादो, तत्र शब्दशक्त्या ये प्रतीयन्ते विरोधादयोलक्वारास्तत्संस्कृतस्वभाव