352. 354 HISTORY OF SANSKRIT POETICS

354 HISTORY OF SANSKRIT POETICS

poetry. Some of the definitions dominated by the rasa school and ध्वनि school are 'आस्वादजीवातुः पदसन्दर्भः काव्यम्' चएडीदास in काव्यप्रकाशदीपिका (p.13); काव्यं रसादिमद्दाक्यं श्रुतं सुखविशेषकृत्' शौद्धोदनि in अलक्वारशेखर (p.2); 'वाक्यं रसात्मकं काव्यं' साहित्यदर्पण; निर्दोषं गुणवत्काव्यमलक्कार रलङ्कृतम्। रसान्वितं कवि: कुर्वन्कीति प्रीति च विन्दति ॥' सर- स्वती०. On account of the limitaions of space imposed in this work it is impossible to refer to the criticisms passed on these definitions. Vide my notes to साहित्यदप pp. 5-30 for some of them. In order to understand the relative positions of रस, ध्वनि, गुख, अलक्कार, रीति in the theory of Poetics, the diffcrent schools or rather theories must be enumerated and their doctrines briefly stated. The principal theories in chronological order of the extant works are those of rasa, of alankāra, of rīti, of dhvani, of vakrokti. Vide ध्वन्यालोक pp. 5-12 where the author refers to three schools, one totally denying the existence of धवनि, the 2nd saying that what is called ध्वनि is included under भक्ति (i.e. उपचार or लक्षया) and the third asserting that eafer is not capable of scientific treat- ment but can only be experienced by the mind of the man of literary taste (सहृदयहृदयसंवेध). In the first class (ध्वन्यभाववादिनः) again three sub-schools are pointed out slightly differing from each other(vide लोचन p.4).समुद्रबन्ध speaks of five schools in a some- what different manner 'इह विशिष्टौ शब्दार्थों काव्यम्। तयोश्च वैशिष्टयं धर्ममुखेन व्यापारमुखेन व्यङ्गयमुखेन वेति त्रयः पताः। आदयेप्यलक्कारतो गुखतो वेति द्वैविध्यम्। द्वितीयेपि भखितिवैचित्रयेण भोगकृत्वेन वेति द्वैविध्यम्। इति पत्तम पन्ञेष्वाध उद्धटादिभि- रक्गीकृतः, द्वितीयो वामनेन, तृतीयो वक्रोक्तिजीवितकारेख, चतुर्थो भट्टनायकेन, पक्जम मानन्दवर्धनेन ।' (p.4). 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, brt as he had no followers, he need not be considered as the founder of a school. The वक्रोक्ति- जीवितकार also had hardly any followers and there was no school and further the meaning of वक्रोकि 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 enu- merited 'तात्परयंशक्तिरभिधा लक्षणानुमिती दविधा। अर्थापत्तिः कचित्तन्त्रं समासोक्त्या- धलङकृतिः ॥ रसस्य कार्यता भोगो व्यापारान्तरबाधनम्। द्वादशेत्थं ध्वनेरस्य स्थिता विश्र- तिपच्तय:॥'. But he points out that, as said in the ध्वनिकारिका (काव्य-