________________
1452
SAHṚDAYALOKA
He follows the views as recorded in the A.bh. First of all he takes up the view of Śrī. Śankuka, without naming him. He observes: (pp. 50, ibid)
"rämóyam ayam evéti yéyam prekṣakadhir nate, anukaryépi rāmā❞dau
sā samyag iti kathyate."
Right-cognition is that which is of the form of "only this (man) is Rāma and Rāma is only this man." This right-cognition is with reference to the original (anukarya) Rāma as well as the actor. This should be the nature of the cognition of the spectator if it is right-cognition.
It will be called false cognition if after the first cognition of the actor being taken as Rāma, there will subsequently arise a cognition, a stronger one, that he is not Rāma.
"ayam sa na iti mithyaiva
bodhād auttara-kālikāt" (pp. 50, ibid)
Doubtful-cognition is of the nature of
"Is he Rama or not ?"
"ayam rāmo na véty eṣā
matiḥ syāt samsaya"tmikā." (pp. 50, ibid).
A cognition of similarity on the part of the spectator takes the form of "this actor is like Rāma." Thus these are the optional cognitions which a spectator may have with reference to the actor who plays the role of Rama in a drama.
But actually the cognition in the context of art is different from all these four types of cognition. This is the view of Sankuka which is explained by Śā. with naming Śankuka. Śankuka holds that art-cognition is different from samyagmithya-samsaya and śādṛśya types of cognitions. This art-cognition takes place on the analogy of "citra-turaga" i.e. a painted horse.
Jain Education International
"citre turaga-buddhyā"di
nyāyenaiva naṭā"diṣu dhiya..." (pp. 50, ibid)
For Personal & Private Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
