Studies in the History of Sanskrit Poetics v2.c83.70

v2.c83.70

does, that particular combinations of letters produce particular *rasas* (see ii 8f). No doubt, in iii 5 f, both the Dhvanikāra and Ānandavardhana speak of *saṃghaṭanā* in connexion with the *guṇas*; but they define *saṃghaṭanā* as depending on the length or shortness of compounds (which would correspond to the definition of *riti* given by Rudraṭa). The appropriateness of the *saṃghaṭanā* depends on the ultimate object of manifesting the *rasa*, as well as on the speaker and the theme. The question, therefore, resolves itself into a theory of suitability or propriety (*aucitya*) with regard to the disposition of words, letters and sentences, having a special reference to the *rasa* (*rasa-niyama*), as well as to the theme in hand (*vācya- or viṣaya-niyama*) and to the temper and character of the speaker (*vaktṛ-niyama*). Ānandavardhana expressly lays down (p. 135) that the *guṇas* are not equivalent to *saṃghaṭanā* (*na guṇāḥ saṃghaṭanā-svarūpāḥ*), nor do they depend on *saṃghaṭanā* (*na ca saṃghaṭanāśrayā guṇāḥ*); on the other hand, the *saṃghaṭanā* depends on the *guṇas*.