26 PAUMACARIU occupy a space of some 24 sides of 12 folios. Thus of the missing 22 folios of SC., about 10 dealt with from the Ukta to the Jagatſ and part of the Atijagati classes of the Varnavrttas, while the twelve tolios preceding them could have well contained the metres of the Aryā, Galitaka and Khânjaka classes. Fortunately there are some positive indications' to believe that Svayambhū did treat the genuine Pk. metres. In the commentary on the fourth stanza (īsīsi cumbižim etc.) Act I of the Abhijñāna- sīkuntala, Räghavabhatļa, while explaining the metre of the stanza makes the following remarks: iyam ca Gitih. Tallaksanam Sambhau- --'caccaravadha-addhe udāsthaddhammi na visame masta guru sattaddha Gii- addhe'. Atra pūrvārdhe pūrvayor imkāra-himnkārayor laghutvam jñeyam. tad uktam tatraiva-'iha ārābindu- juāe osuddhā- paā vasāņam milahu' iti. Here two quotations are given by Rāghavabhatta. The first is hopelessly corrupt. Ercepting the last two syllables Gii all the rest of the text of that quotation is printed in one mass without any word division in the original. It is not possible to make out from this the original wording or sense, but is given with the express statement that this is a definition of the metre Giti quoted from one Sambhu. The second quotation too is somewhat corrupt. Its correct form is as under: iha(i)-ārā bindu-juā, e-o suddhā paāvasāņammi lahu. In the commentary on Śākuntala V 16 also occurs, 'e-o suddhā paāvasāņammi lahu'. These latter two quotations are given toy support the metrically short character of final in and him in a Pk. metre. It is clearly stated that the second quotation in the commen- tary on Sakuntala I 4 is taken from the same source (tatraiva) as the first i.e., from Sambhu according to the text as we have it. Now this second citation is obviously taken from the Svayambhūcchandas of Svayambhū wherein IV 2 reads: i-hi-ārā bindu- juā paāvasaņammi jaha huvanti lahu taha kattha-vi chanda-vasā kāavvå u-hu-ārā!! and further IV 3 reads: biņni-vi e-o suddhā paāvasāṇammi jaha huvanti lahu || etc. Rāghavabhatta has apparently combined SC. IV 2 and 3 in his citation. But there does not appear any reasonable doubt as to Rāghavabhatta's source. Two results follow from this: first, although the name of the authority is given as Sambhu, it is but a corrup- tion of the correct name Svayambhū; second, Svayambhū had also to his credit the treatment of at least the Aryả class of Prakrit metres. Svayambhū and Svayambhücchandas have been quoted by two other late metricians also in the incorrect forms Sambhu and Sambhucchandas. Nārāyaṇabhatta in his commentary (1544 A.D.) on Kedărabhatta's Vittarainakara' mentions sambhucchandas along with the Präkrtapaingala and Cūdámaņi as his sources for the information he supplies regarding Prakrit metres. His words are: Prākſtādişu prāyaḥ paridrstāni chandāmsi Prākſtapaingala- (1) Bhayani, H.C., 'Svayambhū and the Prakrit Metres', BV, n.s. 8, 9-10, Sept.- Oct. 1916. 137-138. The view expressed in that note has been revised here on discovering fresh evidence. (2) Published along with Godbole and Parab's edition of the 'sakuntala', Bombay 1889. (3) Parab. 1902. 68. (4) Though he states that he had examined the above three works, in the por- tion that follows a!l the quotations are from the Präkrta-paingala.
