Studies in the History of Sanskrit Poetics v2.c84.40

v2.c84.40

Kuntala takes up the *rasavat* topically under *vastu-vakratā*, which may relate to both *sahaja* and *āhārya vastu*, the delineation of *rasa* coming apparently under the latter head, which is described as *kavi-śakti-vyutpatti-paripāka-prauḍha*. He criticises the definitions of *rasavat* given by Bhāmaha, Daṇḍin and others, and holds that it is neither *darśita-spaṣṭa-śṛṅgārādi-rasam*, nor *rasa-saṃśrayam*, nor again *rasa-peśalam*, but *rasena tulyam vartamānam*; and consequently it is not an *alaṃkāra* but an *alaṃkārya*. In other words, the *rasa* is awakened in these cases for its own sake, and not for the purpose of embellishing the expressed word and sense. If not theoretically invulnerable, this view is interesting as indicating that the importance of *rasa*, first advocated in poetic theories by the Dhvanikāra, appears to have influenced thinkers belonging to other traditions of thought. The Dhvanikāra attempts to reconcile the older idea