A History of Sanskrit Literature: Classical Period, Vol. I c4.4

c4.4

At least none of the rhetoricians hold this view and there is hardly any evidence in its favour. Winternitz, therefore, is entirely wrong when he says, "The more strenuous the effort of the poet, the more 'ornate' his expressions, and the more difficult his work of art, the more did the prince feel flattered by it." The earliest Sanskrit rhetorician Bhāmaha holds a different view regarding *kāvya*. He says that even if *kāvya* requires explanatory interpretation like a *śāstra*; then it would indeed be a matter of great regret for the common man. This signifies that at least Bhāmaha thought that *kāvya* should be written in such a manner that it should be intelligible to all. He says further that there are indeed different types of style but it is only that type of style which is intelligible to the ignorant, to women and children, that is sweet. Thus, in II. 1-3, he says: *mādhuryam abhivāñchantaḥ prasādaṁ ca sumedhasaḥ / samāsavanti bhūyāṁsi na padāni prayuñjate ॥ kecidojo' bhidhitsantaḥ samasyanti bahūnyapi ॥ śravyaṁ nātisamastārthaṁ kāvyaṁ madhuramisyate / āvidvadanganābālapratītārthaṁ prasādavat ॥*