Sambodhi 1982 Vol 11

Author(s): Dalsukh Malvania, H C Bhayani, Nagin J Shah
Publisher: L D Indology Ahmedabad

Page 25

.-
T. S. Nandi
assthetis relish or ras 3. This is how the whole circuit is completed. The seasible reader or spectator receives the generalised feeling of the poet into his ora soul and enjoys it. This process of eajoymeat is an active process of delectation (āsvāda, carvaņā, rasadā or bhoga).
Rāj sekhara (ch III. 97. At. p. 7. G 0. S. edo •34) observes: सोऽपि प्रस्तुनामोधरा पुत्रायाङ कपालों ददाना शिरसि च चुम्बन्ती स्वस्तिमता चेतसा giant
lati TIR agit 917531 | 397 are 1 (=blessed by) स तया निषादनिहतसहचरीकं क्रौञ्चयुवानं करुण क्रेङ्कारयो गिरा क्रन्दन्तमुदीक्ष्य शोकवान् श्लोकSITE-Atlaqte etc. [fa] 1
Rājaś:khara suggests how divine grace secretly transforms and prepares the poet's local se f to draft the words of poetry It is an activity exclusive in itself and so there can be nothing worldly about it. So, here also, by 'T ', we need not understand that the poet felt unhappy in the normal worldly sense of the term.
Kintaka, under v J. I. 9 explains how extraordinary traits of a given subject make for the jw of the connoesseurs. Zig Fu: etc. is an instance in prin. A further illistration is supplied by citing a verse fron Kālidāsa viz.. ATQYTTET 517178127 etc (Raghu XIV 70). Kuntaka observes that here when it is asked as to, 'who was this sage Valmiki ?', instead of replving bv mentioning directly the name of the sage, it is stated hera-परम कारण कस्य निषादविभिन्नशरुनिमदर्शनमात्र पत्थितः शोकः इलोकत्वमभजत यस्येति तस्य तदवस्थ चनकराचपुत्रीदर्शन विवशवृतेः अन्तकरणपरिस्पन्दः करुणरसपरिपोषागतया सहदयहृदयाहादकारी कवेरभिप्रतः।
This too suggests that the poet, when he writes poetry, is not his ordinary self but his super-relf ' #15fors' self, whose fa:ofiege'activity of mind-takes the form of poetry.
This both Rājas-khara ini Kuntaka though carrying a semblance of difference, virtually agree with Abhinava in got holding 'a: 1:' to be of personal, local nature.