Studies in the History of Sanskrit Poetics v2.c85.39

v2.c85.39

But the point had already been taken up and discussed in his own way by Kuntala who recognised that the poet's intention need not always be to awaken the *rasa* or anything else unexpressed but may be directed simply to producing a certain strikingness of expression in the form of an expressed poetic figure. He analysed poetic expression and found that the elements which went to make up the being of such a figure consisted of a peculiar turn of expression, which produced a certain charm, called *vaicitrya* or *vicchitti-viśeṣa*, and which ultimately depends on the conception of the poet (*kavi-pratibhā-nirvartitatva*)¹. Both these terms are not new, the *kavi-pratibhā* having been acknowledged as essential in a poetic composition by older theorists, and the *saundarya* of Vāmana reappearing under the name of *vaicitrya* or *vicchitti*. The *ukti-vaicitrya* is discussed in another connexion by Ānandavardhana (p. 243); and Mammaṭa (probably under the influence of Kuntala) lays down that the *alaṃkāra* is nothing but *vaicitrya* itself. Abhinavagupta speaks of endless varieties of *upamā-vicchitti* (p. 5), and in another passage (p. 8) uses the term as almost synonymous with *kāmanīyaka* or *cārutva-hetu*.