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.
