History of Sanskrit Poetics c6.97

c6.97

समाधिः’ (III. 1. 13) and ‘अर्थदृष्टिः समाधिः’ (III. 2. 7); for दण्डी, vide काव्यादर्श I. 93 and 100. The *alaṅkāra* school looked upon *alaṅkāras*, which are really of secondary importance and without which *kāvya* can very well exist, as very important. The *rīti* school marks a very real advance over the *alaṅkāra* school. Though it did not reach the real essence of poetry, it approached very near it. Instead of looking upon mere *alaṅkāras* as the essence of poetry, it looked upon the *guṇas* as the essence. The *rīti* school was not yet well aware of that to which the *guṇas* belonged, they had only a glimmering or hazy notion about the real essence of poetry. It is therefore that the ध्वनिकारिका (III. 57) says about the *rīti* school ‘अस्फुटस्फुरितं &c’. वामन included in his वक्रोक्ति (defines as सादृश्यलक्षण) all अविवक्षितवाच्यध्वनि and he seems to have found room for *rasas* in the *guṇa* कान्ति (दीप्तरसत्वं कान्तिः’ काव्या. सू III. 2. 14). *Guṇas* really belong to *rāsa* &c. the soul of poetry. The ध्व. pointed out that माधुर्य is a special characteristic of शृङ्गार, that it reaches the highest pitch in विप्रलम्भशृङ्गार and करुण, that ओजः is found specially where रौद्र, वीर and अद्भुत prevail and that प्रसाद is a *guṇa* common to all *rasas* (ध्वनिकारिका II. 8-11). भामह speaks very briefly of *guṇas* and refers to only three of them, माधुर्य, ओजस् and प्रसाद (II. 1-3). Māgha, who as shown above on p. 113, flourished about or before 750 A.D. appears to have only three *guṇas* in view when he says ‘नैकमेजः प्रसादो वा रसभावविदः कवेः॥’ शिशुपालवध II. 85. Later writers like मम्मट and हेमचन्द्र reduce the *guṇas* to the above three and show that the rest are either included in the three or are really दोषाभाव. The number of *rītis* varies with different writers. राजशेखर in his काव्यमी. (chap. VII. p. 31) quotes a verse that gives the same names of the three *rītis* as वामन; but in his कर्पूरमञ्जरी he speak of three *rītis* as वच्छोमी (from वत्सगुल्म, modern Basim in Berar), मागधी and पञ्चालिआ. रुद्रट and अग्निपुराण (chap. 340) speak of four (लाटीया is added); vide II. 4-6). वाग्भटालङ्कार gives only two like दण्डी. वाग्भट’s काव्यानुशासन names three like वामन; while भोज¹ enumerates six, adding आवन्ती, मागधी and लाटी to वामन’s three.