56. COMMENTATORS OF NĀȚYASĀSTRA 53

COMMENTATORS OF NĀȚYASĀSTRA 53

प्रासङ्िक इतिवृत्त), 382 (on chap. 28 verses 8-10 on आतोध), 397 (on 29. 32), 399 (on 29. 76 where his guru is said to be श्रीपाद),1 420 (chap. 30 on सुषिरवाद्य), 423 (on 30.4one verse and a half are quoted from टीकाकार), 458 (on31. 252). So he ismen- tioned on most of the chapters, if not on all. On the 12 kinds of interlocutions in the plot (22.51-53 GOS)such as आालाप, प्रलाप, उपदेश, अतिदेश, अ्र.भा. (p.176) remarks that commentators have brought in tārkika and mīmāmsaka technique in explaining upaveśa, atideśa and upamāna in the domain of sāhitya and have thereby deluded men of delicate intellect and led them astray: अत्रोपदेशाति- देशयोरुपमानस्य च साहित्यविषये तार्किकमीमांसकविषये विशेषप्रतिपादनं यत् टीका- कारै: कृतं तत्सुकुमारमनोमोहनं वृयाभ्रमषिकामात्रं प्रकृतानुपयोगादिहोपेच्यमेव। Bhattayantra is menioned on p. 208 of vol. Iof .NT. (on नाट्य and नृत्त), Priyatithi (on the लास्याड called सैन्धवक on p. 317 of the B. O. R. I. copy), Bhattavrddhi (Ch. chap. 32. 45 on tālas, p. 514 of B. O. R. I. copy);2 Bhatta Sumanas (as explaining at great length the three verses 46-48 of chap. 31, p. 434 of B. O. R. I. copy), Bhatța Gopāla (G. O. S. vol. II. p. 134 on ध्रुवाताल and on chap. 31 verse 510 of Ch.ed., on p. 502 of B. O. R. I. copy), Rudraka (Rudrața ?) on chap. 31 verse 357 (of Ch. ed. on tāla) at p. 488 of B. O. R. I. copy, Bhatta Śańkara, a devotee of God Sanikara, on वृत्तप्रकरष (chap.32.329 of Ch.ed., p. 524 of B. O. R. I. copy), Ghantaka on नाटिकामेदs (G. O. S. vol. II. p. 436). On the materials available it is not possible to say whether these authors wrote commentaries on some part of the Natyasāstra or whether they wrote independent works in which Bharata's views were discussed. Abhinava appeared to refer to Astāgama on chap.32. 360 (of Ch. ed.) at p. 529 of B. O. R. I. copy.3 The passage is cor- 1. टीकाकृद्धिस्तु सदाशिवमतादिग्रन्थान्तरालिखितं त्रयस्त्रिशदिमे प्रोक्ता अलक्कारा इत्यादि तनं (?) लिखितं अ्न्थान्तरपरिवर्तने शनिष्टप्रसङ्गात् श्रोपादप्रोक्तादिति स्वगुरुमताद् &c.p. 399 of B. O. R. I. copy. 2. तथा च भट्टवृद्धितदत्तादिपासितलयभङ्गलक्षणपुस्तकेषु सर्वत्र शता इति प्रस्तारो दृश्यते। p. 514. The passage is corrupt. Should we read भट्टृवृद्धिदत्तिलादिप्रणीतलय० ? 3. प्रावेशिकोग्रहणामुपलक्षणार्थम्। नृखामिति चेष्टाबाडुल्यमम्भावनात्। अन्ये तु श्रियमपरत्वं व्याचक्षते तच्चाष्टागमपक्षविरुद्धमित्युपेद्यमेव। p. 529.Dr.Raghavan kindly informs me that he holds that wszr7 is a corruption by the copyist of अस्मदागम. I agree and I had already suggested it in the ed. of 1951.