1-63 .. I ••
tnuch reverence by, later writers., so much so: he is styled I;
''Acharyabhinavaguptapadah? Hi^Brtfiat-pratyabhigna-vtmar^ ;
stm gives the date of its composition in terms of the Laukika I
era. He must be assigned to the first half of the loth century•„ \,
He was a poet, logician and philosopher. His JLochana is a |
Commentary on the Dhvanyaloka and forms a treasury of I
rhetorical learning. His Natyalochana forms an explanatory i(
gloss on Bharata's work; likewise his Abkinavabharati. His I;
Shairava-slotra is a collection of vigorous verses in praise |
of Maha-Bhairava and the Mahopadesavimsdti is a series of f
sententious moral maxims. Everywhere he displays his fullr ^ •
ness of knowledge. His arguments are succinct and logical. \
JHis discussions are complete and thoroughgoing. His criticisms- I
though domineering are never dishonoring. ' f
**
Dliananjaya was the son of Vishnu. He lived at Dhara i
in the court of King Munja, (974-993 A. D,) the uncle of Bhoja. t
His Dasarupa must therefore be assigned to the latter half of J
the tenth century. It is almost the first complete treatise on f
the science of Indian dramaturgy. The theory has been already •
developed and is presented in systematic order. Though the f;
work is a decided advance on the rules of Bharata, the rever* ^
ence to the sage- is too great to be infringed or criticised. His brother was Dhanika, whose Avalaka, a commentary on the Dasarupa and v Kavyanirnaya^ an independent treatise on rhetoric, have come down to us.
Ajitasenatyatisvara was a Jain priest of,Charnundarajaj. who flourished about the end of the tenth century A.D. He was the mimsterpf the fenga King. Rajarnalia* ,rH^ Was the teacher of the Kanar,ese poet Nagavarma and heacl of the mutt at Bankn Jpore* He wrote his Sringaramanjari, at the request of Kiog
iunsupported however