History of Sanskrit Poetics c6.82.4

c6.82.4

By the first the *vibhāvas* like Rāma and Sītā are represented to the audience or reader stripped of their individual aspects (साधारणीकरण or साधारणगुणयोग) and the sentiment of love is aroused in the mind and then the audience or reader enjoys a thrill which is आनन्दमय, is different from ordinary experience (अनुभव) or recollection (स्मृति) and is like परब्रह्मास्वाद. The अ. भा. (नाट्यशास्त्र vol. I pp. 278-279) remarks: ‘तस्मात्काव्ये दोषाभावगुणालङ्कारमयत्वलक्षणेन, नाट्यै चतुर्विधाभिनयरूपेण, निबिडनिजमोहसङ्कतानिवारणकारिणा विभावादिसाधारणीकरणात्मना अभिधातो द्वितीयेनांशेन भावकत्वव्यापारेण भाव्यमानो रसोऽनुभवस्मृत्यादिविलक्षणेन रजस्तमोऽनुवेधवैचित्र्यबलाद्हृदि विस्तारविकासलक्षणेन सस्वोद्रेकप्रकाशानन्दमयनिजसंविद्विश्रान्तिलक्षणेन परब्रह्मास्वादविधेन भोगेन परं भुज्यत इति’। It appears from the Locana that Nāyaka accepted that Rasa was the soul of poetry or drama and that it was व्यंग्य. ‘रसः । स च काव्यव्यापारैकगोचरो रसध्वनिरिति । स च ध्वनिरेवेति स एव मुख्यतया- त्मेति' (लोचन p. 18) and 'रसस्य शब्दवाच्यत्वं तेनापि नोपगतमिति व्यङ्ग्यत्वमेव' (लोचन p. 23). He differed from the ध्वनि school in two respects, viz. that रस realisation cannot be described and analysed and that रस is the only suggested sense as the soul of poetry and not वस्तु or अलंकार as the ध्वन्यालोक admitted (on p. 18). अभिनवगुप्त holds the view that rasa is अभिव्यक्त (and not कार्य or ज्ञाप्य).¹ He does not accept the two functions of भट्टनायक (other than अभिधा).