Books / A Rasa Reader Classical Indian Aesthetics Sheldon Pollock

22. 327. I am uncertain of both the text and my translation.

Page 298

  1. I am uncertain of both the text and my translation.

  2. KASS 4.5, above.

  3. DhA p. 330, above.

  4. The context concerns the god Shiva. Rasa requires propriety in order to be a rasa, but subsequently some element of impropriety enters into it and transforms it into something else (or so Kuntaka seems to be framing his opponent's argument).

  5. KS 6.95.

  6. By Kuntaka's new definition, rasavat refers to figurative language in general, which as such is "equal to [vad] rasa" both in ensuring that the literary work is endowed with rasa and in delighting receptive readers (kārikās 3.14-16).

  7. See n. 340 below; adrstadarpaņa- (VV v. 4).

  8. Anandavardhana claimed that manifestation/implicature was at work in these cases as well.

  9. Like that of a light and an object, both of which are manifested quasi-simultaneously (so Ananda, cited VV p. 66).

  10. It is the figurative use of "manifestation" (and not of "implicature") that is at issue; see VV pp. 70, 78 (vyangyatvopacārasya [prayojana-]).

  11. This is largely based on the statements of Ananda himself that the cognition of the aesthetic elements and the cognition of rasa are successive (DhĀ p. 67).

  12. Which when illuminated by a lamp can produce an experience of sublimity (Ruyyaka).

  13. Mahima Bhatta rejects the category of "manifestation" throughout his work; he is only prepared to accept its usage in a figurative sense, to describe the uniqueness of the rasa experience (so Ruyyaka, p. 71).

  14. Abhinava cites the verse in the context of his critique of Bhatta Nayaka (see fragment #13 and n. 40), and it is possible that it should be attributed to Nayaka himself despite the fact that Mahima Bhatta claims never to have seen his work (Pollock 2012b: 241-44). Ruyyaka comments:

" 'Manifested' is meant [literally] by the supporter of the implicature theory, but on [Mahima Bhatta's view] the manifestation is taken as a figurative expression .... Although it is some 'experience' that actually cognizes rasa, the statement [that rasa is an experience] is a figurative expression of their identity, meant to indicate that rasa is something indissociable from its apprehension."

  1. NS 6.34 is cited.

  2. I compress here and omit the citations from the NS adduced to support the argument.

  3. Source unknown. In rasa discourse the term "identification" (tanmayībhāva) is post-Abhinava.

  4. Source unknown.

  5. Of the emotions in the real characters. This is in part the position of Shri Shankuka (see p. 81), with the addition of Abhinava's ideas of relishing and the "heart's concurrence."

  6. Compare Avaloka, p. 217 below, for a related argument.

  7. Dhà 1.13.

  8. DhA 1.5 is cited.

  9. Ruyyaka understands the two uses of viśesa in these two different senses (as "kind" and "excellence").

  10. One cannot have greater or lesser degrees-that is, better and worse degrees-of rasa.

  11. This is meant to refer to the two types of literature, poetry and drama (so Ruyyaka).

  12. Source unknown. The verse illustrates the unqualifiable nature of rasa, the fact that there cannot be degrees of excellence.