Kavyanushasana Critical Study

SR No.: 001713
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: A N Upadhye
Publisher: A N Upadhye
Publication Year: 1987
Total Pages: 558
Language: English
Classification: Book_English, Literature, & Kavya
File Size: 10 MB

Page 231

Šarkuka Controverts Lollata's and Daņain's View
This view is not sound, says Śrī šankuka
1. For, without the Vibhāvādi, the Sthāyin i.e., the permanent mental state or emotion cannot be known. Way? Because the characteristic signs (Avagamaka) or the logical reasons
s) by which cognition is rendered possible, as the fire within a mountain, could not be known, were there no smoke.
2. Besides, Bharata would have explained the nature and scope of the Sthayin first and the Rasas only afterwards, if he had believed that the Sthāyin becomes Rasa through a combination with Vibhāvas which produce them, the Anubhāvas which exhibit them or manifest them and the Vyabhicarins which intensify them. But he has not done so. On the contrary, he has laid down the nature and scope of Rasa at the outset ! Moreover, why has he mentioned the same Vibhāvādi with the Sthāyin after describing them about the Rasas already ? The sage indeed, at every step, is going to proclaim when dealing with the Rasa : 'Atha viro nama etc.'69 And again, while describing the Sthayin he says : Utsaho nāma etc. Dynamic energy means Noble Nature. This is given rise to by lack of grief, energy, endurance, bravery, selflessness, etc. It is acted out by Anubhāvas such as Dhairya, Tyāga, Ārambha, Vaiśāradya etc. Hence, Rasa and Sthayin are not different in meaning or essence. However, the Vibhāvas 70 are extensively dealt with in the definition of Rasa, while in the context of Bhāva, they are only scantily treated of.
The point sought to be made here is : if it were true that the permanent mental states exist before the Rasa, why is it that Bharata first dealt with Rasa (Nātyaśāstra Chapter-VI) and afterwards (Chapter-VII) with the mental states ? Again, if, as Lollața claims, Rasa is no more than an intensified permanent mental state, why should Bharata have explained the Vibhavas of the mental state twice over, once in connection with it in its non-intensified state (Chapter-VID)
206