History of Sanskrit Poetics c6.53.3

c6.53.3

It is to be noted here that समुद्रबन्ध does not mention the *rasa* theory of भरत; while भट्टनायक is really an adherent of the *rasa* school, though his method of explaining it is peculiar (*vide* pp. 221-23). He did not follow the ध्वनिकार in his treatment of the function of words as explained above. Besides these, the view of महिमभट्ट that all ध्वनि is included under अनुमान stands by itself, but as he had no followers, he need not be considered as the founder of a school. The वक्रोक्तिजीवितकार also had hardly any followers and there was no school and further the meaning of वक्रोक्ति has changed from time to time. जयरथ in his विमर्शिनी quotes two verses (p. 9) in which twelve different theories opposed to the *dhvani* theory are enumerated ‘तात्पर्यशक्तिरभिधा लक्षणाऽनुमिती द्विधा। अर्थापत्तिः कश्चित्तन्त्रं समासोक्त्या- अलङ्कृतिः॥ रस्य कार्यता भोगो व्यापारान्तरबाधनम्। द्वादशेत्थं ध्वनेरस्य स्थिता विप्रतिपत्तयः॥’. But he points out that, as said in the ध्वनिकारिका (काव्य- स्वात्मा etc.), three theories opposed to that of ध्वनि are principal. Vide Prof. Sovani’s learned paper in the Bhandarkar Com. vol. pp. 383 ff on the ‘pre-dhvani schools of alaṅkāra’. It may not be strictly accurate to employ the word school for the several पक्षs (theories) about what constitutes the soul of kāvya.