________________
1446
SAHRDAYĀLOKA (B.P. pp. 46, ibid) :
“vịttibhiḥ sahitam gītam tathā vādyā”dibhir yutam, nartanam; gātra-viksepamātram ity ucyate budhaiḥ.” etan nātye ca nștte ca lāsya tāņdavayor api, gundaly ādiņu sarvatra
sādhāranyena vartate.” There are eight types of mental behaviour of the sāmājikas. These eight only are experienced in a drama. The Sāmājikas know (eight) different rasas through them only.
"yatostadhā manovịttiḥ sabhyānām nāțya-karmani, astāv evấnubhūyante
tāsūktās tai rasāḥ prthak.” Śā. thus bases all this, including the discussion on nịtta, nộtya, nāțya etc. and holding of only eight rasas in a drama, on the DR. Thus he follo tradition. It may be noted that the philosophical concepts of the sāmkhya system which he narrated as a background to explain ahamkāra-abhimāna-rasa, seems to be useless. Bhoja also has done such unnecessary exercise. Actually Anandavardhana and Abhinavagupta, who were great 'yogin-s' themselves and very learned philosophers or dārśanikas too, refrained from making this "show-off of their learning. For, their prime task was to discuss aesthetics and not philosophy. But very great as they are, they could afford to do away with such a show of pseudoscholarship to which Śā. falls a prey.
Śā., following the DR. again rejects the case of śānta-rasa with reference to drama. He observes that some theorists mention a ninth mental attitude (i.e. śama), and as a result accept 'śānta' as a (ninth) rasa in drama also.
But the vākyártha-padártha i.e. the content, such as practicing penance etc., on account of their expectancy of being acted (which in itself is not possible) can not be presented on the stage and hence 'śānta' cannot be a rasa in a drama.
Jain Education International
For Personal & Private Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
