Studies in the History of Sanskrit Poetics v2.c87.33

v2.c87.33

constitutes poetry (*guṇavad alaṃkṛtaṃ ca vākyaṃ eva kāvyam*, p. 24). If any definite conclusion can be drawn from this statement, Rājaśekhara, in general theory, appears to recognise tacitly the position of the Rīti school; for in this sentence he reproduces Vāmana's well-known dictum (*kāvya-śabdo'yaṃ guṇālaṃkāra-saṃskṛtayoḥ śabdārthayor vartate*, on i. 1. 1). This is supported also by the apparent disfavour he shows towards the view of Udbhaṭa and Rudraṭa, as well as by the marked partiality attached to the opinions of Maṅgala and Vāmana, whose classification of *rīti* is accepted on p. 31. It is true that his school lays special stress also on *rasa*⁹, and, like most writers coming after Ānandavardhana, Rājaśekhara does not fail to bring *rasa* into prominence. This makes it difficult to take his work as framed definitely for any particular system. But it is clear that his sympathies ally him with the older Rīti and Rasa schools, rather than with the new school of Ānandavardhana, who, though cited at p. 16, does not appear to have influenced his views greatly. It is probable that he is following some old tradition, which stands apart from orthodox schools, but which has many things in common with the older currents of thought and opinion.