________________
Rasa-nişpatti-vicāra in Mammața and Jagannātha
1595 K. P. IV. 26 observes that this rasā"di dhvani, with sequence not noticed therein, consists of such varieties as-rasa, bhāva, rasā”bhāsa, bhāvā"bhāsa, bhāva-śānti etc. All these patterns are different from the figures such as rasavat, etc. (rasady alamkārād bhinnah), for they, i.e. rasa, bhāva etc. are "alamkārya" i.e. "to be adorned", while rasavat and such other emotion based figures are alamkāra-s, i.e. adornments that serve the cause of the principal sentence-sense.
With this Mammata sets himself to explain the fact of rasa, the birth of rasa, how the cognition of rasa is exclusive to the field of art, i.e. how it is "sui generis", and how other cognitions differ from rasa-apprehension. He observes at K. P. IV. 27, 28 :
"kāraṇāny atha kāryāņi sahakārīņi yāni ca, ratyādeḥ sthāyino loke, tāni cen nārya-kāvyayoḥ- (IV. 27) vibhāvā anubhāvās' ca kathyante vyabhicāriņaḥ, vyaktaḥ sa tair vibhāvā"dyaiḥ
sthāyī bhāvaḥ rasaḥ smộtaḥ.” (IV. 28) i.e. The causes, effects and auxiliaries of the basic mental state, such as love, as seen in the world, are found in poetry and drama, and they are termed determinants, consequents and transitories respectively. The basic permanent emotion manifested by these factors such as determinants etc., is known as “rasa.”
It may be noted here that there is a difference in nature and scope between the worldly emotion i.e. laukika-sthāyin and the suggested sthāyin or abhivyakta sthāyin as seen in poetry or drama (or, say, any art; dance, music, painting etc.). So, rasa is "sthāyi-vilaksana" i.e. "laukika-sthāyi-vilaksana" and is different in nature, as it is made of a cognition made of extra-ordinary joy-"anandamayasamvit-svarūpa” as we will go to observe. Mammața follows Abhinavagupta in all aspects of this topic of rasa and rasa-nispatti.
M. begins this discussion by quoting the famous rasa-sútra from Bharata-viz. "vibhāvánubhāva-vyabhicari-samyogād rasa-nispattih." It may be noted that though Anandavardhana's views are also rasa-oriented, he has never cared either to define rasa, or discuss the process of the birth of rasa. He has kept away from it taking it for granted that the learned are fairly conversant with the text of Bharata and the learned commentaries on the Nātya-Šāstra that had preceded him (i.e.
Jain Education International
For Personal & Private Use Only
www.jainelibrary.org
