________________ HEMACANDRA'S TREATMENT OF THE.... 185 (ii) Sthayivilaksano rasah/--Rasa is altogether different from the permanent feeling or emotion; vasanas-latent impressions which man carries from birth to birth. This vasana or sthayibhava is inborn. It is aroused by vibhavas, anubhavas, etc., it is universalised/generalised and this generalised bhava the spectator enjoys by identifying himself or herself with the hero or heroine (of course, on the unconscious level). This enjoyment or relish of rasa continues so long as the vibhavas etc. are present. The sthayibhava when thus universalised and is attended by vibhavas, etc. gets the name/title rasa. When the vibhavas etc., disappear from view rasa ceases to exist. (iii) Rasa is alaukika - out of the ordinary, extra-worldly or non-worldly, different from its sthayibhava. Because of this alaukika nature, even the painful feelings of our everyday life like soka (sorrow), krodha (anger), bhaya (fear) and jugupsa (disgust) become pleasurable. All the eight (or nine) rasas are therefore anandarupa or sukhatmaka (pleasurable). Keith briefly summarises this view of Abhinavagupta in these words : "The sentiment thus excited is peculiar, in that it is essentially universal in character; it is common to all other trained spectators, and it has essentially no personal significance, A sentiment is thus something very different from an ordinary emotion; it is generic and disinterested, while an emotion is individual and immediately personal. An emotion again may be pleasant or painful, but a sentiment is marked by that impersonal joy, characteristic of the contemplation of the supreme being by the adept, a bliss which is absolutely without personal feeling." (The Sanskrit Drama p. 318). Finally, although rasa is alaukika and aprameya (which cannot be known by any of the pramanas--proofs--it does not mean rasa does not exist. For it is sva-samvedana-siddha--it is felt. In the course of his refutation of the rival theories of rasa Abhinavagupta briefly mentions the Samkhya-view which holds that rasa is sukhaduhkhatmaka- 'pleasant and painful. This view is not made clear. Whether each rasa is both pleasant and painful or some rasas are pleasant and some others painful. Abhinava however rejects it summarily out of hand. In his Kavanusasana Hemacandra reproduces the whole section from Abhinavabharati dealing with the exposition of the rasasutra and in unmistakable words declares that in regard to the doctrine of rasa he follows Acarya Abhinavagupta. It is very interesting to find that Hemacandra's close and devoted disciples, Ramacandra and Gunacandra, enunciate in their Natyadarpana that Stud.-24 Jain Education International For Private & Personal Use Only www.jainelibrary.org