Studies in the History of Sanskrit Poetics v2.c80.68

v2.c80.68

³⁰ The two illustrations that Rudraṭa gives under the figure are quoted in the *Kāvya-prakāśa*, and in the *Locana* p. 45. Abhinava distinctly refers to Rudraṭa's *bhāvālaṃkāra* as a case in which the *vyaṅgya* sense is subordinate. Abhinava thinks that Udbhaṭa would take *bhāvālaṃkāra* as *preyas* (p. 71-72) It is remarkable that Ruyyaka, in his review of Rudraṭa's opinion on this point, states that Rudraṭa admits the three kinds of suggestion mentioned by the *dhvani*-theorists. He says that Rudraṭa implies *vastu-dhvani* in the figure *bhāva*, *alaṃkāra-dhvani* in *rūpaka* etc, *rasa-dhvani* in *rasavat*, and *preyas*. But it may be pointed out that excepting what is stated with regard to *vastu-dhvani* being traceable in Rudraṭa's *bhāva*, the remark does not apply. Rudraṭa does not mention, define or otherwise deal with the figures *rasavat*, *preyas* etc, nor does he speak of *pratiyamānā utprekṣā* referred to by Ruyyaka in this connexion (although he gives an example of implied *utprekṣā* in ix 13). See on this point Jacobi in *ZDMG* lxii, 1908, p. 295 fn 5.