RASA THEORY

 

RASA THEORY

Introduction:

Sanskrit literature, where writings of a philosophical and speculative nature abound, has been a fertile field for critical theorizing too. From the earliest beginning of Bharata and Bhamaha, up to the present day many books have been written in Sanskrit with a view to enlightening the reader on the nature and scope of literature and on the nature of aesthetic delight.

Within the course of many centuries, ideas issued forth and controversies raged in an attempt to find out the criterion of good poetry and the nature of aesthetic delight. It can be said that this quest took the form of an attempt to find answers to some major problems.

What is poetry? What constitutes its body (sarira) and what is its soul? (atman) What is the definition of poetry? What is its purpose and what is the nature of the delight it imparts to the sympathetic reader? What constitutes the difference between the speech of poetry (kavyokti) on one hand and the scientific poetry (sastrokti) on the other. In what respect does poetry transcend the matter- of –fact speech (varta) and ordinary conversational speech? What are the essential qualities that a poet should possess? In trying to arrive at a satisfactory solution to these problems almost every critic was preoccupied with the notion that words and meaning form the body of poetry and with the search for what constitutes its soul (atman).

As a result of this process of theorizing eight concepts were realized. These eight are named rasa, alamkara, guna, riti, dhvani, anumiti, vakrokti and auchitya. The writings of the different ‘schools’ if taken in separation would sometimes convey the impression that they were the result of independent thought. But when viewed in a broad perspective, a thread of continuity, is seen running through all of them and the ideas of a successive school.

 

BHARAT AND HIS MAGNUM OPUS:

Bharat was the earliest known writer to deal with literary criticism and he was considered by almost every later writer as the first exponent of the rasa theory, it would seem logical to consider the rasa school or the earliest of the theories expounded in Sanskrit poetics.

Bharatmuni is a legendry sage and his epoch making The Natyasastra  is sarvavarnika Panchamved in his own words.

The Natyasastra  is the oldest and the most comprehensive work on Indian dramaturgy. The Natyasastra  is a work ascribed to Bharat, though nothing definite is known about either the author or the date of the composition of the text.

Almost every aspect of drama and dramatic representation are discussed here in. Bharatmuni also deals with rasa as an attempt to explain the aesthetic objective of dramatic representation which has immortalized him in the world of Sanskrit poetics. Extolling the extraordinary comprehensiveness of The Natyasastra. G. Vijayvardhan says,

“In Bharat’s The Natyasastra rasa is not the principle subject of discussion, but forms one of the many subjects dealt with in connection with drama and its representation on the stage.”

The rasa theory was an attempt to indicate the ‘character of the emotional effect of drama’ i.e. the nature of enjoynment experienced by the spectator in witnessing a play. Hence in ultimate analysis it was an attempt to define the purpose of drama or in later aesthetic thought of any work of art, for in Indian aesthetic artistic delight in all cases is comprehended in terms of rasa.

R.Gnoli, in his ‘Aesthetic Experience according to Abhinavgupta says,

“Aesthetic experience is, therefore, the act of tasting of this rasa, of immersing oneself in it to the exclusion of all else.”

 

RASA THEORY:

The theory of rasa or aesthetic emotion can be stated with Bharat’s maxim,

‘Vibhavanubhava-vyabhichari- samyogad rasanispattih’

(Rasa is born out of the combination of vibhavas, anubhavas and vyabhicharibhavas.”

VIBHAVAS:

Vibhava is the objective condition of producing an emotion.

Vibhavas are of two kinds:

ALAMBAN
UDDIPAN

Alamban Vibhav is the determinant towards which an emotion is manifested.  For example,

Shkuntala is the alamban vibhava of Dushyant’s love.

Alamban vibhava means a person or persons with reference to whom the emotion is manifested.

Uddipan vibhavas are environmental factors that excite an emotion . For example,

Spring season, moonlight, a secluded peace and such in the case of love.

 

ANUBHAVAS

Anubhavas means bodily expression by which the emotion is expressed. If love is the dominant emotion, sweet words, arch glances of a lady, her inviting smile may be regarded as anubhavas.

VYABHICHARIBHAVAS:

Vyabhicharibhavas are transitory mental states that accompany and help to intensify the dominant emotion. Vyabhicharibhavas are also called sancharibhavas. Sancharibhav is not fix or constant feelings. They keep changing in course of time and according to situation context. The word sanchari means moving or wondering which suggests the nature of sancharibhav. It  does not remain with a person for long time, after few moments it becomes invisible. Sancharibhav is contrary or opposite to sthayibhav and it is called as transitory feeing. Sancharibhav have been enumerated thirty in numbers, yet more can also be accepted. They are nirveda (indifference), glani (weakness), sanka (apprehension), asura (envy or jealousy), mada (intoxication), srama (fatigue), alasya (indolence), dainya (depression), cinta (anxiety), moha (delusion), smriti (recollection), dhrti (contentment), vrida (shame), capalata (inconsistency), harsa (joy), avega (agitation), gaiva (arrogance), jadata (stuper), visada(despair), antsuka (longing), nidra (sleep), apsamra (Epilepsy), supta (dreaming), vibodha (awekning), amasara (indignation), avahitta (dissimulation), 94 ugrata (ferocity), mati (resolve), vyadhi (sickness), unmada (insanity), marana (death), trasa (terror), vitarka (trepidation).

These feelings are neither inborn, nor permanent, but born out of the emotions themselves for ex. The bashfulness is born out of love the depression out of sorrow etc. more over the transitory feelings are attached with more than one emotions, for ex. The feelings like unsteadiness, longing, madness, remorse, dejection, sickness, agony, despair, depression, nearing death etc. are attached with the emotions sorrow as well as with love and also with fear.  For example, anxiety, envy, depression are vyabhicharians of love.

 

A woman in love anxiously waiting to meet her lover, may feel disappointed that he is not coming, may be anxious that something might have happened to him, may be jealous that he might have been courted by another woman, may feel delight in remembering the coaxing words that he had whispered into her ears and so on. So these bhavas can be called Vyabhiacharians of love.

STHAYIBHAVAS

The foundation of rasa is based upon a particular view of psychology, which holds that human personality is constituted both towards its motivation and intellection of a few primary emotions which lie deep in the subconscious or unconscious strata of human being. Sthayibhava is the permanent emotions that manifest in the mind, According to Bharat,

Ratihaasshya shokashcha

Krodhotsaho bhayam tatha

Jugupsa vismayshcheti sthayi bhava prakrutitta

Rati (love), Hasa (laughter), soka (sorrow), Krodha (anger) , Utsah (heroism), bhaya (fear) Jugupsa (disgust) and vismaya (wonder )

These emotions are running through all natures in a permanent manner and may in that sense be called dominanat emotions. And there are eight main rasa which correspond with the 8 Sthayibhavas. Bharat says,

Shrungarhaasya karunaha raudravira bhayanakaha

Bibhatsadbhut sangyo cha ashto natye rasaha smrutaha

Later writers added the night rasa santa with sama (serenity )as the sthayin.

 

SATVIKBHAVA

The Sattivikbhav has not been much discussed in the debate of rasa theory but it has significant role in understanding of rasa theory. The Sattivikbhav is called as involuntary status of mind of a person. Sattivikbhav is an inbuilt body response besides other bhava. The sativikbhavas are eight in numbers as follws stambha (paralysis), pralaya (fainting), romanca (horripilation), sveda (perspiration), asru (tears), vairarnya (change of color), vipathu (trembling), vaisvarya or svarbhanga (change of the voce or breaking of the voice).

 

Sattivikbhav are in build bodily responses to the situation, for ex. When someone see an angry person, his body expression represents that he is angry, his bodily expression like his words with full of anger, his eyes with red color, the wrathful emotion on his face are some Sattivikbhav which indicates anger of the person.

BY WHAT PROCESS RASA IS EVOKED?

How is rasa produced? According to the ancient theorists each of us is fitted with a built-in structure of ‘sthayi bhavas’ or basic mental states which are the modified forms of basic drives or instincts as a result of centuries of evolutionary process of humanization and social living. These sthayibhavas (permanent emotions)’, which are chiefly eight in number, are heightened to a relishable state called ‘rasadasha’ by the poet so that we have one rasa or emotion corresponding to each of them. It is the sthayi bhava which is the basis of rasa. Vibhava, anubhava and vyabhicharibhava awaken this innate emotion bringing it into a relishable flavour called rasa. This flavour or state remains subjective unless it is delineated by the poet in kavya where he objectifies his experience.

 

Bhatt Lollata considered the manifestation of rasa a result of an intensification of sthayibhavas, through other causes such as vibhava and anubhava. Thus, in his thory the sthayibhava and rasa stand in relation of cause and effect. When sthayin is intensified to the heighest pitch, it turns into rasa.

 

Nature of Rasa

It is the sthayibhava that becomes rasa, but in the process it undergoes a transformation and takes a totally different form. It is like milk getting transformed into curd. Rasa is quite different from the sthayin. Rasa is in all instances pleasurable, while sthayins are painful in some instances. If rasa were painful, nobody would be inclined to experience it. Rasa is said to be an experience whose nature is alaukik i.e transcending the bounds of worldly experience.

 

Rasa is not experienced by all but only some who have special capacity for it. i.e the sahradayas. This enjoynment takes place through an abundance in these individuals, of the quality of sattva, over and above the other qualities of rajas and tamas, achieved through constant perusal of literature. It is of the nature of ananda-delecation or pleasure, and is mind made.

 

The experience of rasa is transcendental in nature, and it has its essence or soul, camatkar, a peculiar state of wonder. Rasa is enjoyed as itself, undivided and identical with its own form. That is to say, while being experienced there is no separate cognition of rasa and its enjoynment. It is realized as an unitary whole, identical with its knowledge and hence the only proof of its, existence is its enjoyment by the sahradaya. 

 

OBSTACLES:
Abhinavgupta speaks of some obstacles lying in the way of rasa- realization. These obstacles present an interesting study, as they bring into light some flaws to be avoided in poetry.

 

 The first of these obstacles has been described as, ‘the lack of adequate realization of probability or the reasonableness of things.’ Whatever incidents presented in a literary composition must be such that the reader is convinced of their probability. If incidents which transcend the nature of ordinary life are to be presented in literature, it should be done only with reference to character of the same transcendental caliber. The fact that Hanuman leapt the ocean is not in conflict with the reader’s credulity, as that character is well known to possess superhuman powers. Thus the presentation of events should be such that it contributes to a ‘ willing suspension of disbelief.’ In the reader.

 

The second and third obstacles of rasprapti laid down by Abhinavgupta pertain to the circumstances where the reader is unable to experience a generalized state of emotion. If the reader realized the emotions existing in himself or in some other particular individual, no generalization is possible. The reader is bound to be biased by his own prejudices. Again if reader is preoccupied with his own sorrows or joy, then too he is unable to react to the emotions presented in literature, and generalize them.

 

The fourth and fifth obstacles shown by Abhinavgupta pertain to the lack of clarity of perception of things presented before the reader. If the vibhavas and anubhavas do not lend themselves to immediate realization or they are not sufficiently clear, the evocation of rasa is hindered.

 

The reader’s mind always tends to find repose in the predominantly presented things and therby to skip over those subordinate. Thus, the absence of a properly brought out dominant element is the sixth obstacle to rasa.

 

It was noted that sthayin and vyabhicharians are but relative , dependant on the intended rasa. Similarly vibhavas and anubhavas too are not specifically connected with any sthayin. The same character can be the determinant of more than one emotion, the same consequent can arise out of different emotions, and the same transitory, mental state can accompany different emotions. Hence if these factors are presented individually, a doubt may possibly arise as to which sthayin is intended to be developed. This doubt is the last obstacle to rasa realization.