Studies in the History of Sanskrit Poetics v2.c86.69

v2.c86.69

Thus Viśvanātha explains the *bhāva* as follows : *sañcāriṇaḥ pradhānāni, devādi-viṣayā ratiḥ |* *udbuddha-mātraḥ sthāyī ca, bhāva ity-abhidhīyate ||* In other words, when the Accessories are principal, or when love etc., has a deity or the like for its object, or when a dominant feeling (*sthāyi-bhāva*) is merely awakened, we have *bhāva*. His own gloss upon the above verse explains it in this way. Although they are always concomitants of *rasa* in which they finally rest, such Accessories as are for the time being principally developed, like a servant for the time being followed by his king in his marriage procession ; or love etc. having a deity, a sage, a spiritual guide, a king and the like for its object ; or such *sthāyi-bhāvas* as are merely awakened or have not attained the state of a *rasa* from their not being fully developed, are denoted by the term *bhāva*. In all these cases apparently there is no complete or proper development of *rasa*; and a *bhāva*, therefore, in later terminology, may be generally described as an incomplete *rasa*. But this must be distinguished from the *rasābhāsa* or semblance of *rasa* and the analogous *bhāvābhāsa*, which occur when the poetic sentiments and emotions are falsely attributed (e.g. sentiment in animals such as described in *Kumāra-sambhava*, III. 36-7), or when they are brought out improperly, i.e. when there is a lack of entireness in them as regards their ingredients ⁴¹. The cases occur, according to Bhoja (v 20), when the mood or emotion is developed in an inferior character (*hīna-pātru*), in animals (*tiryak*), in the rival hero (*nāyaka-pratiyogin*) or in any other subordinate object (*gauṇa padārtha*) 42, but Viśvanātha elaborately summarises various other cases (iii 263-66), especially noting improprieties in connexion with particular *rasas*. Thus there is an impropriety if the Terrible (*bhayānaka*) is made to reside in a noble personage, or the Comic (*hāsya*) in a spiritual guide. It must be noted, as Jagan-nātha explains, that if a mood or feeling is developed by impropriety, the impropriety, unless it acts as a bar, does not constitute a fault 43.