काव्यालङ्कार (आचार्य भामह - भारतीय काव्यशास्त्र एवं अलङ्कार-सिद्धान्त मूल महाग्रन्थ सटीक)

32 BHĀMAHĀLAṄKĀRA
Gauḍas represent the प्राच्यs, the eastern school. Bhā-
maha's attack is directed only against the twofold
classification of poetry. वैदर्भी and गौडी as the opposite-
types of रीति or style are recognised in later works
of rhetoric. रीति as a distinct entity in poetry seems
to be of later origin and perhaps it owes its origin
to Vāmana who says that रीति is the soul of poetry.
रीतिरात्मा काव्यस्य. Vāmana supplements the two types
of वैदर्भी and गौडी by a third one named पाञ्चाली Viśva-
nātha adds one more, लाटी. Sarasvatī Kaṇṭhābharaṇa
gives two more—आवन्ती and मागधी. Of these the वैदर्भी
and गौडी styles represent two opposite extremes.
Simplicity and elegance are the essence of the वैदर्भी
style whereas verbal pomposity is of the गौडी style.
रीति is nowhere mentioned by Bhāmaha. If we bear
this in mind and note that his attack is directed
only against a division of poetry into Vaidarbha
and Gauḍa, all his discussion relating to the two
will become intelligible. मन्यन्ते सुधियोऽपरे betrays the
author's aversion to recognise Vaidarbha as a dis-
tinct type of poetry. तदेव च किल ज्यायः Vaidarbha
alone is superior. Is it not? This is said in ridi-
cule of the idea. सदर्थं अपि नापरम् Not anything else
though conveying good sense. Simply because it
does not bear the name of Vaidarbha.
गौडीयमिदमेतत्तु वैदर्भमिति किं पृथक् ।
गतानुगतिकन्यायान्नानाख्येयममेधसाम् ॥ ३२ ॥