________________
Rasa-niṣpatti-vicāra in Abhinavagupta
1531
Here, the discussion on the views of the purvā"cārya-s i.e. the predecessors ends in the A.bh. We saw that Lollata's view was refuted by Sankuka and Sankuka's stand was refuted by Tauta. The main objection against Bhaṭṭa Nayaka was against "bhoga", which he held as different from all types of perception,
All these thinkers have contributed in their own way to the cause of aesthetics. The result is that the thinking on rasa-niṣpatti was raised to higher and higher level. It is true that the relation of poet's world with the real worldly context gives the cultured reader or spectator-the sāmājika-the expertise to catch the mental feelings in their true perspective. The poet's world has a sound foundation in form of practical world. Insistence on this point could be the basic contribution of Lollata. On the other hand Śrī Śankuka lays greater stress on the inferential process concerning the understanding and apprehension of feelings based on the similarity between the world of the poet and the practical world. Bhaṭṭa Nayaka insists on the all acceptable and rich fact of "sādhāraṇī-karana" i.e. generalisation, better termed de-individualisation. But we can trace the roots of this thought current even in Bharata. What is fresh about Bhaṭṭa Nayaka's thesis is that he has projected bhāvakatva-vyāpāra that brings about sadhāraṇīkarana. This is equivalent to the presence of gunas and alamkāras in poetry with absence of dosas, and it operates through the medium of four-fold representation -caturvidha-abhinaya-in drama. But as we will go to see, when Abhinavagupta will explain, that virtually this bhāvakatva-vyāpāra is covered up by the vyañjanā-vyāpāra as supported by the great Anandavardhana. And this vyañjanavyāpāra was projected by theorists quite earlier than the bhavakatva-vyāpāra. The difference if any, is in name only. Bhaṭṭa Nayaka's "bhoga" also does not fall beyond the scope of rasapratiti, and this is clearly explained by Abhinavagupta as noticed by us earlier. Of course the mental states of druti, vistara, and vikāsa following rasa-experience could be taken as an important contribution of Bhaṭṭa Nayaka, but we feel that the uselessness of recognising only three mental states as argued by Abhinavagupta is quite convincing and virtually the mental state, peri passu with rasa-experience, and following the same, could be covered up by the acceptance of Santa-rasa or mahārasa as ably supported by Anandavardhana and Abhinavagupta,. Again, the concepts of druti, vistara, vikāsa can be correlated with the concept of mādhuryā"di gunas as supported by the dhvanivādins. True, with further research, Abhinavagupta has accepted some of the basic concepts or ideas advocated by Bhaṭṭa Nayaka, and some, though not accepted, are, in turn, accepted by Abhinavagupta in a new guise. Thus the area of differenes between Bhaṭṭa Nayaka
Jain Education International
For Personal & Private Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
