354. 356 HISTORY OF SANSKRIT POETICS

356 HISTORY OF SANSKRIT POETICS

Ta primarily means 'taste' or 'flavour' or 'savour', or 'relish' but metaphorically it means 'the emotional experience of beauty in poetry and drama'. Mammata speaks of the poet's work as 'hladaikamayi' (comprising pleasure or delight alone). It thus emphasizes the effect of poetry on the reader. Sanskrit writers also were aware of the fact that literature can be divided into two classes as De Quincey said viz. 'literature of knowledge' and 'literature of power'. The former teaches while the latter moves. The two kinds may be often mixed up in the same work but it is possible to keep them entirely separate. Literary criticism, whether in Sanskrit works or else- where, is mainly concerned with works of the second of the two classes mentioned above. No question of being right or wrong arises as regards the 2nd class of literature, which mainly comprises Poetry, Drama and Fiction. There is a distinction between intuitive consiousness and consiousness arrived at by reasoning. o (on p. 253) makes the position clear that no question of being right or wrong arises as to the suggested sense of poetry 'काव्यविषये च व्यज्ञयप्रतीतीनां सत्यासत्यनिरुपण- स्याप्रयोजकत्वमेवेति तत्र प्रमाखान्तरव्यापारपरीक्षा उपहासायैव संपधते'. The relation of rasas to poetry in general was not systematically dealt with till the Dhvanyaloka was composed. But it would not be correct to say that writers on Poetics were not at all cognisant of the employment of or importance of rasas. The Kavyadarsa I. 62 says 'कामं सर्वोप्यलक्कारो रसमर्थें निषिश्चति। तथाप्यग्राम्य- तैवैनं भारं वहति भूयसा ।'. In II. 280-292 the काव्यादर्श describes how the figure Tua4 is dependent on one of the eight rasas and they further show that Dandin was quite aware of the diffe- rence between स्थायिभाव and रस. Vide काव्यादर्श I. 51, 64 also. Bhamaha III. 6 (रसवद् दर्शितस्पष्टश्क्ारादिरसं यथा।) shows that he was aware of rasas, but did not treat them as the most essen- tial element in poetry. He says in I. 21 that a mahākāvya should be endowed with rasas (युक्त लोकस्वभावेन रसश्च विविधः पृथक्). वामन also says 'दीप्तरसत्वं कान्ति:।' III. 2. 24. Both Dandin (I. 31) and Bhamaha (I. 24) leave out of account dramas (which they regard as a kind of kāvya) and refer the curious reader to other works for rules about them. It appears that in ancient times poems and dramas ordinarily were looked upon as separ.ite compartments. Writers on Poetics did not at first include a treatment of rasas in their works. az is the first extant