________________
Sanskrit Sāhityaśāstra
181
century A.D.), Alamkara-mahodadhi, (Ist half of 13th century A.D.), Kävyānuśāsana, (14th century A.D.) and Sțngārārņava-candrikā (last quarter of the 13th century A.D. ?) respectively, have nothing new to say about rasa. They follow, as a rule, the standard works on poetics. Acārya Hemacandra expressly states that he bases his view of rasa upon that of Abhinavagupta. The credit of presenting graphically and vigorously the view that all rasas are not pleasurable but some alone are pleasurable and some painful, goes to Rāmacandra and Guņacandra, the joint Jaina authors of the Natyadarpana (latter half of the 12th century A.D.). They were pupils of Ācārya Hemacandra, the author of Kävyänuśäsana. They, however, do not agree with their master, for whom they have great reverence, as to the nature of rasa and set forth cogently their own view which may be termed as sukha-duḥkhātmaväda as opposed to Kevalânandavāda according to which all rasas are always pleasurable. According to the Natya-darpanas 1. śựngāra 2. häsya 3. vira 4. adbhuta and 5. śānta are pleasurable whereas 1. karuna 2. raudra 3. bibhatsa and 4. bhayānaka are painful. They say : the view that all rasas are pleasurable goes against experience. The karuna, raudra, etc., when presented on the stage or in poetry cause indescribable pain to the spectators or sensitive readers. They experience Camat kära, only at the end of rasāsvāda due to the poet's and actors' power and skill of presentation. Persons (like Abhinavagupta) duped-carried away by this camatkāra, regard the karuna, raudra, etc. as pleasurable although in reality they are painful. Attracted by this aesthetic experience of grief etc., spectators feel like going to plays in which karuna is present. Poets and playwrights compose poems and plays which consist in pleasure and pain in accordance with this worldly life itself which consists in both pleasure and pain. Witnessing of tragic events on the stage never produces pleasure. If the representation of tragic events be pleasurable then the representation itself will have to be called misrepresentation.
The Natyadarpana holds that the sthāyibhāva itself, when developed by vibhāvas and vyabhicäribhāyas, and manifested by anubhāvas is to be called rasa. This view of the nature of rasa is identical with the utpattivāda or puști-väda of Lollata (and Dandi), and most probably with Bharata's own view of rasa as found in the Natyaśāstra. For Bharata explicitly says: Sthayibhāväńsca rasat vam upaneşyāmah |
-NS, Vol. I, Ch. VI, p. 299 and sthàyyeva tu raso bhavet
-NS, Vol. I, Ch. VI. p. 379 2 साधारणीभावना च विभावादिभिरिति श्रीमानभिनवगुप्ताचार्यः । एतन्मतमेव चास्माभिरुपजीवितमिति ।
-Kävyānuśāsana (p. 103) (Mahavira Jaina Vidyalaya,
Bombay edition) 3 तत्रेष्टविभावादिप्रथितस्वरूपसंपत्तयः शृङ्गार-हास्य-वीराद्भुत-शान्ताः पञ्च सुखात्मानोऽपरे पुनरनिष्टविभावायुपनीतात्मानः करुणरौद्र-बीभत्स-भयानकाश्चत्वारो दुःखारमानः । यत् पुनः सर्वरसानां सुखात्मकत्वमुच्यते, तत् hafta ( ? la ) aaa !
-P. 141 (GOS, Baroda, 1959 edition)
