9. 6 HISTORY OF SANSKRIT POETICS

6 HISTORY OF SANSKRIT POETICS

कोकs of the भगवद्गीता by combining half verses of the latter. Chapters 359-366 contain lexical matter almost the whole of which is identical with the verses and portions of verses of the अमरकोश. It cannot be supposed that all these works (the गीता, अ्रमरकोश &C.) borrowed from the अभिपुराण. It must be supposed that the अभिपुराख in its desire to give summaries of every branch of literature drew upon the lexicon that was most popular when the purana was compiled. Various dates have been assigned to अमरसिंह. Prof. Macdonell (H.S.L. p. 433) thinks it not improbable that he flourished about 500 A. D. Max Muller says that the अमरकोश was translated into Chinese in the 6th century (India; what can it teach us ? lst. ed. p. 232). Dr. Hoernle ( JRAS 1906 p. 940) places the अमरकोश between 625 and 940 A. D. rather on shadowy grounds. Mr. Oak places it in the 4th century A. D. Taking even this early date, the अगिपुरास, if it borrowed from the अमरकोश, cannot be earlier than the 6th or 7th century A. D., as a good deal of time must have elapsed before the अमरकोश could attain a pre-eminent position as a lexicon. (b) The अभिपुराख says that the riti Bharati was so called because it was promulgated by भरत (भरतेन प्रखीतत्वाद्भारती रीतिरच्यते। chap. 339. 6). aa says that he promulgated the four vrttis by order of Brahma and that the भारतीवृत्ति was so called after the Bharatas (मया काव्यक्रियाहेतोः प्रतिप्ता द्रहिणाशया॥ ... स्वनामधेयैः भरतैः प्रयुक्ता सा भारती नाम भवेत्तु वृत्तिः ॥ नाय्य. 22. 23 and 25, K. M. ch. 22. 23 and 25=GOS ed. chap. 20. 24-26. This shows that the अगिपुरासं had before it the नाट्यशास्त्र of भरत (or at least the portion dealing with वृत्तिs). Though the नाट्यशास knows works of the purana class (अन्येऽपि देशाः प्राच्यां ये पुराये संप्रकीर्तिताः । नाव्य. 14. 46, K. M. 13. 46), yet it nowhere alludes to the अम्निपुराख. (c) There are numerous verses in the अभिपुरास that are identical with verses of the नाट्यशास्त्र. Compare नाव्य. 6. 36 first half and अभि. 338. 12; नाट्य. 6. 39 and अभनि. 348.7-9; नाव्य. 22. 28-29 and अभि. 337. 11-12; नाट्य. 17. 63-65 and अग्नि. 342. 15-17. Taking the express statement of the Purana that it was to be an encyclopaedia of all vidyas and the character of the two works into consideration it will have to be conceded that it is the अग्निपुराण that borrows. (d) The definitions of रूपक, उत्प्रेक्षा, विशेषोकि, विभावना, अपह्नुति and समाधि given by the अग्निपुराय (343, 23, 24-25, 26-27, 27-28