Sahrdayaloka Part 03

SR No.: 006910
Original Sutra Author: N/A
Author: Tapasvi Nandi
Publisher: L D Indology Ahmedabad
Publication Year: 2005
Total Pages: 676
Language: English
Classification: Book_English
File Size: 15 MB

Page 279

1454
SAHRDAYĀLOKA But, śā. further observes, that the Bharatas who know dramaturgy say that this (= as explained by Sankuka) is not so
"naivam ity eva bharatā
nātya-vedártha-vedinah.” (pp. 51, ibid) Who these Bharata-s are, we do not know. But in the A.bh. we know that the preceptors (=upādhyāyāh) of Abhinavagupta refuted Sankukas views. Without naming, śā. also presents the views of these Upādhyāyas (i.e. Tauta, perhaps). Śā. observes : (pp. 51, ibid) :
“naivam ity eva bharatā nātya-vedártha-vedinah, rāmā"di-buddhir yā nātye preksakāņām națā"dişu, séyam na samsayamatir na viparyāsa-dhir api naiva sādrśya-dhir esā,
na citra-turagā"tmikāExperts in dramaturgy hold the view that the cognition of Rāma in the actor, by the specators, is not of the form of doubt (=samśaya), nor of the form of similarity (=sādrśya), nor a false cognition(viparyāsa).
It is not of the form of "citra-turaga” cognition as well.
The reason is that, as there is no possibility of a doubt due to factors viz. time and space, it can not be of the form of doubt. Spectators know that Rāma happened to be in times and place quite different from the present. So, no doubt of the form of, "Could the actor be Rāma ?" can ever take place in the mind of the spectators. On account of subsequent termination of cognition, it certainly can not be a false cognition. The cognition that takes place during performance can not be of the form of similarity for the spectators know that there is no ghost of a chance of similarity between the legendary Rāma and the poor actor. Rāma is presented through poetry and nața is very much existing before the eyes of the spectators. This can not be a cognition on the analogy of 'citra-turaga' also, for the spectators know the artificiality connected with the horse that is painted in a picture. All painted things are not real but only artificial. The painting again is insantient, while the actor is a santient being. So, on earth, there can never be a