________________
arose in the commentaries on The Nātyaśāstra. Vide : "The Exponent of Ābhāsa concept in Rasa Theory" in Festschrift Charudev Shastri, 1974.
In an excellent review of the concept of Rasābhāsa (Studies in Indian Poetics, pp. 91-100), Prof. S. P. Bhattacharya blames Mammața for being 'terse and concise at the expense of precision' in his definition of Rasābhāsa. His failure to explain what Anaucitya means causes confusion and leads to two sets of views : Anaucitya in the sense of (1) non-applicability of the definition of the Rasa concerned or (2) as partial application thereof. Hemachandra follows the second line but supplements it with another idea derived from "a tradition different from that usually associated with Bharata. ... There is no Rasa but Rasābhāsa in connection with animal's (Tiryakşu) is a view of this line of thought which has been subjected to adverse criticism" (Vide Ekavali, B.S.S. Ed. p. 106 for this criticism. But vide Rasārņavasudhākara (p. 268), a stray advocate of the tradition represented by Bhoja, for a counter-attack. Udbhata uses Anaucityapravṛtta and Abhāsa.... known to Mammata (Vide Ibid, pp. 91-92, 94-97). Dr. Krishnamoorthy commends Bhoja's clarification, which Hemachandra heeds. (Essays etc., pp. 114-136) Hemachandra treats of Rasābhāsa in two Sūtras (II. 54 and 55) and is more explicit on Anaucitya. He proves to be a good follower of Ānandavardhana. (Vide K.A.S. pp. 16, 18, 65, 102, 149, 199 etc.)
Finally, J. L. Masson and M. V. Patawardhan refer to the curious fact that "the important concept of Ābhāsa is not dealt with" in the N. S. and lament Bharata's oversight in distinguishing genuine situations from spurious ones. They criticise many of later discussions as they "smack of too much theorizing". Vide 'Aesthetic Rapture' Vol. I, p. 42.
496
Jain Education International
For Private & Personal Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
