Studies in the History of Sanskrit Poetics v2.c86.61

v2.c86.61

Viśvanātha primarily admits eight orthodox *rasas* (iii. p. 160) but adds the ninth *śānta* in deference to the views of these authorities, and a tenth *rasa*, called *vatsala* or parental affection, subscribing apparently to Vaiṣṇava ideas (pp. 185-6)³⁵. He quotes a verse to explain that the mood, called by the great sages the Quietistic, which has, among all sentiments, tranquillity (*śama*) as its basis, is that state in which there is neither pain nor pleasure, nor hatred, nor affection, nor any desire³⁶. But the question arises how can the Quietistic, being of the nature described, arising only in a state of emancipation wherein there is an absence of all feelings like the Accessories etc., be *rasa*, which implies a state of relishable enjoyment³⁷. To this objection he replies that the Quietistic is a *rasa* because in that state the soul is only about to be emancipated (*yukta-viyukta-daśā*) and is not completely absorbed in the Divine, so that the presence of feelings, like the Accessories etc. in it, is not incompatible. As for the statement that there is an absence of even pleasure in it, it is not contradictory, for it refers only to worldly pleasure³⁸. Jagannātha, the latest authority on the subject, advocates nine rasas and maintains (pp. 29-30) that like all other rasas, the śānta is capable of being represented and appreciated by the audience. Since the clever performance of the actor, representing such a state of mind, free from disturbance and not affected by passions or desire, is found in actual experience to produce an impression on the mind of the audience, it is their state of mind, exhibited by their silent and rapt attention, which ought to settle the question. The representation of absolute indifference or the actor's power of representing it is not the point in issue : it is the capacity of the spectator who actually feels the sentiment. Jagannātha also adds that even those, who do not admit this rasa in the drama, should accept it in poetry from the fact that poems like the Mahābhārata have for principal theme the delineation of śānta rasa, which is thus established by universal experience (akhila-lokānubhava-siddhatvāt). Nāgeśa remarks on this that the śānta rasa should also be admitted in the drama on this ground, inasmuch as the Prabodha-candródaya is universally acknowledged as a drama (p. 30).