The Sāhityakaṇṭakoddhāra /36

साहित्यकण्टकोद्धारः
 
संहितैकपदे नित्या नित्या धातूपसर्गयोः ।

नित्या समासे वाक्ये तु सा विवक्षामपेक्षते[^31] ॥
 

 
इति न्यायेन सन्धिर्नास्तीत्याहुः । [^32]काव्यप्रकाशखण्डनकारास्तु इदमेव हृदि

निधाय सन्धेवँर्वैरूप्यं नाम दोषं निराकुर्युः ।
 

अथ कथम्
 

स्फुटोत्पलाभ्यामलिदम्पतीव तद्-

विलोचनाभ्यां कुचकुड्मलाशया ।
 
vivaks
 
vivakṣitaś ca sandhir bhavati (na to avivaksv avivakṣitaḥ) ityuktyäāśrayane taṇe tāni+indor
ityatra sandhyabha
ityatra sandhyabhāvaḥ aduşta evṣṭa evĀa. (p. 143; AnandaĀandāśrama, 1921)
 

 
This remark shows that in the days of Manāṇikyacandra, aicchikasandhyabhava
āva
was accepted to be correct by some writers. SŚaraṇadeva in his Durghatṭavṛtti

on 6.1.87 says thus :
 

ekapade' pi samhita anityäpi saṃhitā anityā etc. tathā ca rakṣitenoktam
 
samhitaikapade nitya ityādi prayikam iti.
 

saṃhitaikapade nityā ityādi prāyikam iti.
Maitreyarakṣita probably belonged to the beginning of the 12th century.

Similarly Näāgeśa in his commentary on the Kavyaprakasāvyaprakaśa-pradiīpa notes:
aicchikasandhyabhavasya khedādinā vicchidya pathe na duştatvam iti kecit. yathā

aicchikasandhyabhāvasya khedādinā vicchidya pāṭhe na duṣṭatvam iti kecit. yathā
ekā ekā śiroruha iti. The aādi in khedādinā deserves attention. It is thus clear that

even in the days of Näāgesśa, there were some who accepted the aicchikasandhya-
bhä
bhāva 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.
 
īnās tu.
[^31]. This kārikā (samṃhitaikapade etc.) is attributed to Bhartṛhari in the

Baālamanoramaā. See Siddhantakaumudi on Seşe vibhäşāntakaumudī on Śeṣe vibhāṣa etc. (8.4.18). But the
kärikä
kārikā is not found in the available Väkyapadiākyapadīya. Bhattṭṭoji in his SŚabda-
kaustubha says about sam
kaustubha says about saṃhitaikapade etc. thus :
 
iyam pracam
iyaṃ prācāṃ paribhāṣā ekadeśänumatidvārā samhitādhikāreņānumatidvārā saṃhitādhikāreṇaiva jñāpitā.
asamhitayam yan
asaṃhitāyaṃ yaṇādinivṛttyartho hi samhitadhikaṃhitādhikāraḥ.
 

(Ibid. on A I U N; p. 31)
 

This remark seems to imply that the dictum samṃhitaikapade etc. was very

ancient and that it was in existence even before Panāṇini, who approved of its

acceptability by means of his governing rule Samṃhitāyām (6.1.72).
 

[^32]. It does not seem to be a reference to Siddhicandra, the author of the

Kavyaprakasakhandāvyaprakāśakhaṇḍana, as S. C. counts the aicchikasandhyabhāva to be a dosṣa (see

pp. 38-39; K. P. Kh.).
 

S. C. simply says (after the K. P.) thus :
 
samhitam na karomiti svecchaya sakrd api dosah
saṃhitaṃ na karomīti svecchayā sakṛd api doṣaḥ. pragrhyādihetuke to asakrt.
ṛhyādihetuke to asakṛt.
(p. 39).
 

 
It may be a reference to SŚrivatsaläāncchana, who in his Kaāvyāmṛta (S.V.

U.O Series 1,1971; p. 31) rejects the visandhi-doşṣa along with upahatalupta-

visarga, and hatavṛtta. He does not use the words aicchikasandhyabhavo na dosah.
āvo na doṣaḥ.
He does not quote the line : saā vivakṣām apekṣate. But he says eteşāmṣāṃ gunaābhāva-
ru
rūpatvam eva, na doşatvam. ṣatvam. Śrivatsalāñcchana was earlier than Jagannātha*.
Srivatsalañcchana was earlier than Jagannatha*.
ee the Introduction on the date of the author of the See the Introduction on the date of the author of the S.K.U.