IXTRODUCTION 21 tions can be traced' to PC. The conclusion is obvious that probably all the anonymous illustrations in SC. are taken from Svayambhu's own works. In their case, the source being quite obviously under- stood, he saw no propriety in attaching his name. This clearly proves common authorship for SC. and PC. Citing the stanza Sri-Harso nipunah kavih etc. in SC. (I 144 a) and the reference to śri-Harsa in RC. as making a present of nipuratva to Svayambhū supports the same conclusion". This invalidates several inferences of Velankar regarding Svayambhú and SC. SC. is not very ambitious. Its expressed aim is to give in a nutshell the essential features of Pk. and Ap. prosody. In the closing stanza of each chapter the work is described as pancarsa- sara-hua 'the substance of the five Gaņas'. The concluding stanza of Ch. III states: pāua-sīro parisamatto the choice matter of the Prakrit prosody has been treated.' The same remark is repeated at the opening of Ch. V. Its Prakrit Section The Prakrit section of SC. presents several surprises for us. Though it is called Prakrtasára it does not treat in its available portion any of the genuine Pk. Mātrāvſttas'. What is given in the Pk. section are the well-known Akşaravrttas of the Sanskrit prosody with their Sama (from the Uktā to the Utkrti class, the Sesa-vittas and the Dandakas), Ardhasama and Vişama divisions. In the fragment of Sc. preserved to us there is nothing corresponding to the fourth chapter of Hemacandra's Chandonusāsana describing the Arya, Galitaka, Khañjaka and sirşaka class of Pk. metres. What is still stranger, these so-called Pk. metres are defined as if they were Mātrāvſttas. They are defined, not by using the well- known Akşaraganas (ya, ra, ta, etc.), but by using a special terminology of Māträganas, such as ta, taara, etc., for a Tri-matra, ca, cagaña, camsa for a Caturmätra and so on, with the particulari- zation of the type of the Gana as required. Moreover, as noted previously, Svayambhú, unlike Hemacan- dra, does not compose his own illustrations to support the metrical rules and definitions in Sc. He prefers to illustrate from the then available Pk. and Ap. literatures and in many a case the name of the author also is prefixed to the stanza cited. Thereby we come to know of a large number of Pk. and Ap. poets almost all of whom were so far quite unknown to us. It also gives us a gilmpse of the riches of Pk. and Ap. literature cultivated in and before Svayam- bhū's time. Its A pabhraméa Section The Ap. section of SC. is important from several viewpoints. The sources for the study of Ap. prosody are considerably few and their usefulness is further diminished by their sketchy, incomplete indiscriminately eclectic character. So far Hemacandra's or (1) Modi, 1940, 172, Prem, 1942, 383-384. This matter is dealt with further below. (2) Siri-Harisem niya-niunattanau'. Appendix I, passage 57, line 90 (3) Premi, 1942, 384. (4) Summary of the contents, importance and other information concerning SC. will be found in the abovementioned articles of Velankar and in Premi, 1942. Velankar reproduces some of this information in the introduction to his edition of Rajasekhara's Chandaisekhara, 1946, 1-14.
