2023-04-10 05:19:38 by ambuda-bot
This page has not been fully proofread.
साहित्यकण्टकोद्धारः
संहितैकपदे नित्या नित्या धातूपसर्गयोः ।
नित्या समासे वाक्ये तु सा विवक्षामपेक्षते ॥
इति न्यायेन सन्धिर्नास्तीत्याहुः । काव्यप्रकाशखण्डनकारास्तु इदमेव हृदि
निधाय सन्धेवँरूप्यं नाम दोषं निराकुर्युः ।
अथ कथम्
स्फुटोत्पलाभ्यामलिदम्पतीव तद्-
विलोचनाभ्यां कुचकुड्मलाशया ।
vivaksitaś ca sandhir bhavati (na to avivaksitaḥ) ityuktyäśrayane tani+indor
ityatra sandhyabhavaḥ aduşta eva. (p. 143; Anandaśrama, 1921)
This remark shows that in the days of Manikyacandra, aicchikasandhyabhava
was accepted to be correct by some writers. Saraṇadeva in his Durghatavṛtti
on 6.1.87 says thus :
ekapade' pi samhita anityä etc. tathā ca rakṣitenoktam
samhitaikapade nitya ityādi prayikam iti.
Maitreyarakṣita probably belonged to the beginning of the 12th century.
Similarly Nägeśa in his commentary on the Kavyaprakasa-pradipa notes:
aicchikasandhyabhavasya khedādinā vicchidya pathe na duştatvam iti kecit. yathā
ekā ekā śiroruha iti. The adi in khedādinā deserves attention. It is thus clear that
even in the days of Nägesa, there were some who accepted the aicchikasandhya-
bhäva even in verse to be correct. The author of the S.K.U. has in mind these
writers, who seem to be referred to as navinās tu.
31. This kārikā (samhitaikapade etc.) is attributed to Bhartṛhari in the
Balamanorama. See Siddhantakaumudi on Seşe vibhäşa etc. (8.4.18). But the
kärikä is not found in the available Väkyapadiya. Bhattoji in his Sabda-
kaustubha says about samhitaikapade etc. thus :
iyam pracam paribhāṣā ekadeśänumatidvārā samhitādhikāreņaiva jñāpitā.
asamhitayam yanādinivṛttyartho hi samhitadhikaraḥ.
(Ibid. on A IU N; p. 31)
This remark seems to imply that the dictum samhitaikapade etc. was very
ancient and that it was in existence even before Panini, who approved of its
acceptability by means of his governing rule Samhitāyām (6.1.72).
32. It does not seem to be a reference to Siddhicandra, the author of the
Kavyaprakasakhandana, as S. C. counts the aicchikasandhyabhāva to be a dosa (see
pp. 38-39; K. P. Kh.).
S. C. simply says (after the K. P.) thus :
samhitam na karomiti svecchaya sakrd api dosah. pragrhyādihetuke to asakrt.
(p. 39).
It may be a reference to Srivatsaläncchana, who in his Kavyāmṛta (S.V.
U.O Series 1,1971; p. 31) rejects the visandhi-doşa along with upahatalupta-
visarga, and hatavṛtta. He does not use the words aicchikasandhyabhavo na dosah.
He does not quote the line : sa vivakṣām apekṣate. But he says eteşām gunabhāva-
rupatvam eva, na doşatvam. Srivatsalañcchana was earlier than Jagannatha*.
See the Introduction on the date of the author of the S.K.U.
संहितैकपदे नित्या नित्या धातूपसर्गयोः ।
नित्या समासे वाक्ये तु सा विवक्षामपेक्षते ॥
इति न्यायेन सन्धिर्नास्तीत्याहुः । काव्यप्रकाशखण्डनकारास्तु इदमेव हृदि
निधाय सन्धेवँरूप्यं नाम दोषं निराकुर्युः ।
अथ कथम्
स्फुटोत्पलाभ्यामलिदम्पतीव तद्-
विलोचनाभ्यां कुचकुड्मलाशया ।
vivaksitaś ca sandhir bhavati (na to avivaksitaḥ) ityuktyäśrayane tani+indor
ityatra sandhyabhavaḥ aduşta eva. (p. 143; Anandaśrama, 1921)
This remark shows that in the days of Manikyacandra, aicchikasandhyabhava
was accepted to be correct by some writers. Saraṇadeva in his Durghatavṛtti
on 6.1.87 says thus :
ekapade' pi samhita anityä etc. tathā ca rakṣitenoktam
samhitaikapade nitya ityādi prayikam iti.
Maitreyarakṣita probably belonged to the beginning of the 12th century.
Similarly Nägeśa in his commentary on the Kavyaprakasa-pradipa notes:
aicchikasandhyabhavasya khedādinā vicchidya pathe na duştatvam iti kecit. yathā
ekā ekā śiroruha iti. The adi in khedādinā deserves attention. It is thus clear that
even in the days of Nägesa, there were some who accepted the aicchikasandhya-
bhäva even in verse to be correct. The author of the S.K.U. has in mind these
writers, who seem to be referred to as navinās tu.
31. This kārikā (samhitaikapade etc.) is attributed to Bhartṛhari in the
Balamanorama. See Siddhantakaumudi on Seşe vibhäşa etc. (8.4.18). But the
kärikä is not found in the available Väkyapadiya. Bhattoji in his Sabda-
kaustubha says about samhitaikapade etc. thus :
iyam pracam paribhāṣā ekadeśänumatidvārā samhitādhikāreņaiva jñāpitā.
asamhitayam yanādinivṛttyartho hi samhitadhikaraḥ.
(Ibid. on A IU N; p. 31)
This remark seems to imply that the dictum samhitaikapade etc. was very
ancient and that it was in existence even before Panini, who approved of its
acceptability by means of his governing rule Samhitāyām (6.1.72).
32. It does not seem to be a reference to Siddhicandra, the author of the
Kavyaprakasakhandana, as S. C. counts the aicchikasandhyabhāva to be a dosa (see
pp. 38-39; K. P. Kh.).
S. C. simply says (after the K. P.) thus :
samhitam na karomiti svecchaya sakrd api dosah. pragrhyādihetuke to asakrt.
(p. 39).
It may be a reference to Srivatsaläncchana, who in his Kavyāmṛta (S.V.
U.O Series 1,1971; p. 31) rejects the visandhi-doşa along with upahatalupta-
visarga, and hatavṛtta. He does not use the words aicchikasandhyabhavo na dosah.
He does not quote the line : sa vivakṣām apekṣate. But he says eteşām gunabhāva-
rupatvam eva, na doşatvam. Srivatsalañcchana was earlier than Jagannatha*.
See the Introduction on the date of the author of the S.K.U.