Studies in the History of Sanskrit Poetics v1.c44.1

v1.c44.1

Viśvanātha never cites Ruyyaka (as well Mammaṭa) by name; but, like Vidyādhara and Vidyānātha, he draws very considerably upon the works of both. He adopts, for instance, the definitions of the figures *upameyópamā* and *bhrānti-mān* directly from Ruyyaka, and admits the two figures *vikalpa* and *vicitra* which, both Ruyyaka and Jayaratha inform us, were inventions of Ruyyaka’s¹. It is quite possible, as Kane holds², that the censorious glancing on Mammaṭa’s text, reproved by Viśvanātha (*ad* ii 14, p. 57), refers in particular to Ruyyaka’s *Saṃketa* commentary where the latter criticises Mammaṭa on the particular point under discussion. But a surer indication of Viśvanātha’s acquaintance with Ruyyaka’s works is given by his quotation of the verse *bhujaṅga-kuṇḍali-vyakta*⁰ at p. 445 (*ad* x 2), which Ruyyaka himself cites (p. 19) as his own from the *Śrīkaṇṭha-stava*. Viśvanātha quotes two other writers who, in all probability, belong to this century, viz., Jayadeva, author of the *Gita-govinda*¹, and Śrīharṣa, author of the *Naiṣadha*². Again, the *Rāja-taraṅgiṇī* iv 441 is quoted in our text at p. 529, *ad* x 57a (possibly indirectly through Ruyyaka p. 93); but this work of Kalhaṇa’s was not completed till the middle of the 12th century. All this will roughly fix one terminus to the date of Viśvanātha, who cannot thus be placed earlier than the end of the 12th or the beginning of the 13th century.