67. 64 HISTORY OF SANSKRIT POETICS

64 HISTORY OF SANSKRIT POETICS

कपिलरुद्र (No. 3787) and सुभा० of a कपिलरुद्र (1666). This shows that there were many Rudras. On रुद्रट (XI.24) नमिसाधु again quotes मेधाविन् about the seven दोषs of simile and the manner in which he deals with this topic suggests that the examples he gives are taken from Medhavin's work, अत्र च स्वरूपोपादाने सत्यपि चत्वार इति ग्रहयाधन्मेधाविप्रभृतिभिरुक्तं यथा लिग्वचनमेदौ हीनताधिक्यम- सम्भवो विपर्ययोऽसादृश्यमिति सप्तोपमादोषा :... तदेतन्निरस्तम्' नमिसाधु quotes seven verses illustrating the seven faults of Upamā mentioned by Medhavin. Five of these seven occur in भामह's काव्यालक्कार II.40, 47,55, 58, 63. The two verses illustrating उपमानोप मेययोलिंन्वचनभेद and हीनता that do not occur in भामह are, 'भच्िताः सक्तवो राजषशुद्धा: कुलवधूरिव। परमातेव निःस्नेहा शीतला: परकार्यवत् ।' and स्फुरन्ति निखिला नीले तारका गगने निशि। भास्कराभीशुसंस्पृष्टा कृमयः कदमे यथा ।.' नमिसाधु mentions the seven examples immediately after mentioning मेधाविन and does not name भामह with regard to them. नमिसाधु mentions भामह by name on रुद्रट 8.84. If the verses were भामह's he would have probably so stated. Therefore, NTHE should be taken as quoting five verses from मेधाविन्. On p.9 (on रुद्रट II.2) नमिसाधु tells us that मेधाविरुद्ध and others gave only four divisions of शब्द 'एत एव चत्वार: शब्दविधा इति येषां सम्यङ मतं तत्र तेषु नामादिषु मध्ये मेधाविरुद्रप्रमृतिभिः कर्मप्रवचनीया नोक्ता भवेयुः'. The त्रिकाएडशेष gives मेधाविरुद्र and कालिदास as synonyms. The काव्यमी० tells us that मेधाविरुद्र and कुमारदास were poets blind from birth (p. 12) and quotes कालिदास as a writer on Poetics (p. 14). The work of मेधाविन् has not come down to modern times. 5. A passage in the वासवदत्ता of Subandhu (Hall's ed.p.235) 'बौद्धसङ्गतिमिवालक्वारभूषिताम' led many scholars like Aufrecht(Indische Studien, vol.16 pp. 205-207), Hall, Peterson (Preface to सुभा० p. 47 and J. B. B. R. A. S. vol. 16 p. 173) and Telang (in J. B. B. B. R. A.S. vol. 18 pp. 148, 150) to regard धर्मकीर्ति as one of the oldest writers on Alankara, following the explanation of शिवराम that अलक्वार was a work of धर्मकीर्ति. But the Srirangam edition reads (p. 303), 'सत्कविकाव्यर चनामिवालक्कारप्रसाधिताम्'. Moreover, there is nothing beside this passage to show that धर्मकीति wrote a work on Poetics. Prof. Batukanath in 'Brief Survey of Sāhitya-sāstra' (J. of Dept. of Letters, Calcutta, vol. IX. p. 119) simply repeats what Aufrecht said. That the Buddhist Dharmakirti was a poet appears to follow from quotations contained in the anthologies where he is often cited as अदन्तवर्मकीर्ति (शाङ०No. 947, सुभा०657; सुभा 737,1587, 1617, 2246, 3232). The ध्वन्यांलोक (p.270) quotes the