________________
“Concept of Rasa” as seen in Anandavardhana and......
1387 lakṣma-sandhyantarā”khyāni
salamkāreșu teșu ca." Dhanika observes : (pp. 250, ibid) -
"vibhūdsanam cā'ksara-samhatiś ca,
śobhā'bhimānau gunakīrtanam ca.” - ity evam ādīni șat-trimśat kāvya-lakṣaṇāni, 'sāma bhedaḥ pradānam ca' ity evam ādīni sandhyantarāny ekavimśatir upamādişv alamkāreșu harşótsāhādişv antarbhavanti. tena na prthag uktāni.”
Dhanañjaya ends his work with a famous expression that there is no object on earth, howsoever ugly, or even if it be a non-object so to say, which does not attain the status of rasa-bhāva. DR. IV. 86 (pp. 250, 251) reads :
"ramyam jugupsitam udāram athā'pi nicam, ugram prasādi gahanam vikstam ca vastu, yad vā'py a-vastu kavi-bhāvaka-bhāvyamānam tan nā'sti yan na
rasa-bhāvam upaiti loke.” The Laghaţikā of Bhatta Nșsimha adds (pp. 251, ibid) : ramya-jugupsitā"dirūpam vastu a-vastu.vā rasībhūya kavi-bhāvena anākrāntam loke násti ityā”ha - ramyam iti.
It may be observed that after Abhinavagupta these two viz. Dhananjaya and Dhanika have come up with a great contribution in the field of art-criticism. They
he court of Muñja and were the protegonists of the Mālava School of aesthetics with a lot of influence of Bhattanāyaka and mighty following in the works of Bhoja and some others. We see how the Mālava School has wielded its influence on even Rāmacandra and Gunacandra who were disciples of Ācārya Hemacandra, an artent follower of the Kashmir School of thought as represented by the great Ānandavardhana, Abhinavagupta and Mammața. Even śāradātanaya the author of Bhāvaprakāśana, Sāgaranandin the author of Nātaka-laksana-ratnakośa, and Singa-bhūpāla the author of Rasārņava-Sudhākara were influenced by
Jain Education International
For Personal & Private Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
