Book Title: Sambodhi 2006 Vol 30 Author(s): J B Shah, N M Kansara Publisher: L D Indology AhmedabadPage 33
________________ Vol. XXX, 2006 RUDRATA'S TREATMENT OF RASA 27 Then in the context of the treatment of SRH, Rudrata deals with the varieties of track and Fifts in the most systematic manner for which the succeeding ages of the history of poetics were beholden to and almost copied from Rudrata. So from this treatment, of rasa, it will be observed that here Rudrata has either charted out his own path or he is following some other school now not known to us. Whatever may be the case, from his treatment of rasa, we can surmise that it is important from three points of view viz (i) The highest place accorded to śrngāra (ii) treatment of 7140-fach from the point of view of rasa and lastly and most importantly (iii) Rudrața's recognition of preyān rasa. Rudrata's recognition of preyān rasa is a very important advancement in the history of Sanskrit poetics and it requires elaboration and elucidation. Rudrata went out of his way to recognise preyān rasa as an entirely new rasa. Ruclrața's this according recognition to a new rasa has a wider and farreaching significance in the history of Sanskrit poetics and, it is saddening to note that modern historians of Sanskrit poetics have failed to grasp the significance of this phenomenon, and consequently they have failed to take a note of this stage in the process of rasa-thought, reached by Rudrata. There lies the importance of Rudrața as a Sanskrit literary critic. Occasionally, we know, that, there have been attempts at increasing the number of rasas to the originally listed eight rasas by Bharatamuni, There was a vigorous attempt on the part of the various Sanskrit literary critics like Abhinavagupta to add a ninth śānta rasa to the eight rasas originally enunciated by Bharata, and ultimately the ninth rasa śānta was included in the list. Similar have been various attempts on the part of the poeticians to add various rasas to the now universally accepted nine rasas. This activity of adding or creating a new rasa on the part of the Sanskrit literary critic assumes significance in that sense that, it throws light upon the conception of rasa of that particular literary critic. Importance of Rudrata as a literary critic can only be grasped if we take into account his conception of rasa arising out of his creating a new rasa Preyān.Page Navigation
1 ... 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256