________________
1392
SÁHRDAYĀLOKA sa rasā"svāda-virame sati yathā'-vasthita-vastu-pradarśakena kavi-nata-saktikauśalena. vismayante hi sirscheda-kārinā'pi prahāra-kuśalena vairinā śaundīramāninaḥ. anena eva ca sarvángā”hlādakena kavi-nata-śakti-janmanā camatkāreņa vipra-labdhāh paramānanda-rūpatām duḥkhā"tmakeşv api karuņā"dişu sumedhasah pratijänate. etad āsvāda-laulyena preksakā api etesu pravartante. kavayas tu sukha-duhkhā"tmakasamsārā'nurūpyena rāmā"di-caritam nibadhnantah sukha-duḥkhā”tmaka-rasanu-viddham eva grathnanti. pānaka-mādhuryam iva ca tiksnā"svadena duhkhā"svādena sutarām sukhāni svadante iti.
bi ca sītāvah haranam. draupadyāh kacámbarā”karsanam, hariscandrasya cāņdāla-dāsyam, rohitāśvasya maranam, lakṣmaṇasya śaktibhedanam, mālatyā vyāpādanā”rambhaņam ity ady abhinīyamānam paśyatām sahțdayānām ko nāma sukhā"svādah." ?
The arguments are advanced on the theory that laukika-rasa and kāvyānātya"di-gata-rasa are absolutely identical in nature. The ND. seems to accept 'rasa' - even at worldly level, but we know that the school represented by Abhinavagupta accepts the possibility of rasa in the context of art only.
The ND., believes that the actual sorrowful behaviour results with reference to the karuna, as experienced by actual Rāma (i.e. real anukārya). This expression of sorrow is of the nature of unhappiness only. If its imitation causes happiness, then it cannot be considered to be actual imitation, for it would look contradictory : "tathă anukāryagatāś ca karuņā”dayaḥ paridevitā'nu(di)kāryatvāt tāvad duhkhā"tmakā eva. yadi ca'nukarane sukhā"tmānah syur na samyag anukaranam syāt. viparītatvena bhāsanād iti." (pp. 292, ibid)
This shows that the ND. has failed even to understand the true significance of Bharata's words viz. "natyam... bhāvā'nukirtanam". Gross imitation and artful representation or recreation are never identical.
The ND. observes further that when there is experience of happiness even in the context of the karuna. being either staged or described, actually it is a taste of unhappiness only. Only a miserable person will feel happy while listening to the miserable condition of some other unhappy person. He will be unhappy on listening to the joy of somebody else. So, Karuna and such other rasas have to be taken as causing unhappiness.
All these arguments may hold good when psychology of 'people in ordinary worldly context is looked into. But only the elect enter the world of art. Only the people blessed with divine sensitivity have an admission in the world of art wherein laws of gross physical world pale into insignificance
Jain Education International
For Personal & Private Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org