1. Aesthetic Enjoyment Its Background in Philosophy and Medicine Sen R.K

AESTHETIC ENJOYMENT

ITS BACKGROUND IN PHILOSOPHY AND MEDICINE

R. K. SEN

1966

AESTHETIC ENJOYMENT

ITS BACKGROUND IN PHILOSOPHY AND MEDICINE

R. K. Sen, M.A., LL.B., D.Litt.

UNIVERSITY OF CALCUTTA

1966

AESTHETIC ENJOYMENT

ITS BACKGROUND IN PHILOSOPHY AND MEDICINE

R. K. Sen, M.A., LL.B., D.Litt.

Calcutta University

UNIVERSITY OF CALCUTTA

1966

Published by

Sibendranath Kanjilal

Superintendent, Calcutta University Press

48, Hazra Road, Calcutta.

Printed by

T. K. Mitra

Venus Printing Works

52/7. Bipin Behari Ganguly Street

Calcutta-12.

Rupees 25/- only.

Corrigendum

Page

Line

In place of

read

32

1

.. swdya ..

.. swadya ..

37

18

.. doses ..

.. dosas ..

40

22

.. in only ..

.. is only ..

41

4

.. affiliate ..

.. affiliates ..

48

34

.. occupy ..

.. occupies ..

69

1

.. pr na ..

.. prana ..

76

14

.. मोक्षणं ..

.. मोक्षणं ..

76

17

.. मात्रका ..

.. vasesa ..

102

14

.. vises ..

.. vasesa ..

130

19

.. jada, buddhi ..

.. jada buddhi ..

131

5

.. Samphya ..

.. Samkhya ..

147

36

.. reasons ..

.. seasons ..

156

3

.. qualived ..

.. qualified ..

157

10

.. ajana ..

.. ajnana ..

157

31

.. परस्पर ..

.. परस्पर ..

161

12

.. stand of ..

.. stands for ..

172

20

.. in Vasudeva ..

.. is Vasudeva ..

176

26

.. interpretors ..

.. interpreters ..

185

.. presuppose ..

.. presupposes ..

220

39

.. perfet ..

.. perfect ..

227

9

.. stifle ..

.. stifle ..

238

34

.. how tihs ..

.. how this ..

266

9

.. through Abhinava ..

.. though Abhinava ..

268

27

.. Srotamise ceti....to be ..

.. — ..

269

26

.. Hinus ..

.. Hindus ..

284

7

.. careful to not ..

.. careful to note ..

285

19

.. bhaya it ..

.. bhaya is ..

312

18

.. This vibhavas ..

.. These vibhavas ..

342

39

.. The maparity ..

.. The majority ..

351

11

.. obviously in minid ..

.. obviously in mind ..

351

37

.. Vyabhicharihavas ..

.. Vyabhicharibhavs ..

461

1

.. otherrs ..

.. others, ..

462

38

.. compability ..

.. compatibility ..

472

31

.. this thesis ..

.. This thesis ..

475

21

.. first thrree ..

.. first three ..

476

9

.. Taxilla is ..

.. Taxilla ..

476

19

.. it necssary ..

.. it necessary ..

PREFACE

The present work which for the first time, seeks to offer a systematic account of the background of the concept of rasa, is the outcome of twelve years of study in different centres of classical learning all over India. The author had the unique opportunity of working with three great scholars, two of whom alas, are no longer living. They are Mahamahopadhyaya Gopinath Kaviraja, M.A., D.Litt., the late Mahamahopadhyaya Yogendranath Bagchi, D.Litt., and the late Mahamahopadhyaya Vidhusekhara Bhattacharyya, D.Litt. The work has been principally carried out in Banaras and Calcutta, though the author has worked in Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, Poona, as also in Madras.

This work on rasa might appear as extremely unorthodox, and shock many prejudices and upset many dogmatically held opinions. The author has pointed out in the Introduction the broad lines of difference with the work of Dr. S. N. Das Gupta, M.A., D.Litt., Mahamahopadhyaya P. V. Kane, M.A., D.Litt., and Dr. S. K. De, M.A., D.Litt. A scholar working in any branch of Alamkara would be ungrateful if he fails to acknowledge his great indebtedness to the work of these scholars of first eminence. But the author has become more and more convinced that inspite of the real merit and excellence of their work, it is exclusive, cut off from the broad currents of Bharata’s contemporary thought (vide Introduction). It is not with a little regret that he has to turn away from his first lessons in Alamkara.

This work urges on all disinterested lovers of knowledge to look at the problem of rasa from a comprehensive standpoint, including body, mind and over-mind. The problem is at once physiological, psychological and metaphysical. It is unfortunate that the problem of rasa has so long been looked at as if it belongs exclusively to mind. A careful study of this thesis will convince an impartial critic that in ancient Indian thought, mind is not divorced from body, just as in another direction, it is inalienably associated with over-mind. The relation of body and mind, and Bharata’s great indebtedness to Ayurvedic speculations have been worked out in detail for the first time in Chapters II, VI, VII and VIII. The relation of mind and over-

mind has been analysed in Chapter XI. These materials and

standpoints, brought in for the first time, make necessary a

complete re-orientation of the concept of rasa. Such an analysis

of the concept of rasa in conformity with the philosophical and

physiological speculations of the ancient Hindus has been

attempted in Chapters IX and X.

Scholars who find it difficult to reconcile themselves to the

position that Bharata is deeply indebted to Ayurveda, should

remember that an exactly similar position is held in European

aesthetics. The pathological background of Aristotle’s kathar-

sis of pity and fear is well-known. Dr. Bernays in Zwei Abhan-

dlungen die Aristotelische Theorie des Drama (Berlin, 1857) has

shown how the doctrine of katharsis is deeply influenced by

Greek medical speculations. As early as 1954, the present wri-

ter in a booklet, “A Brief Introduction to a Comparative Study

of Greek and Indian Poetics” pointed out the broad lines of

parallelism between Greek and Indian medical and aesthetic

speculations.

The truth in this ancient doctrine of the Hindus and the

Greeks that body and mind are inter-dependent, has been re-

emphasized in modern times by writers and scientific workers.

Inspite of Descartes’ denial that body and mind are keyed

together (vide Introduction and Ch. III), there is a growing

consciousness that the one cannot be separated from the other,

and for a proper understanding of any one, the two must be

taken together. In the growth of this consciousness, scientists,

psychologists, medical men as well as aesthetes have played

equal part. The position though it was visualised and formulat-

ed more than two thousand years ago in India as also in Greece,

emphasize an essentially modern standpoint, accepted by phy-

siologists and psychologists alike. Pavlov and J. B. S. Haldane

(with whom the author had the opportunity of discussing the

problem) have verified the truth of this contention from the

physiologist’s standpoint, while there is almost overwhelming

evidence from the standpoint of the psychologist, as can be seen

from the works of Macdougall, Jung and I. A. Richards.

The author gratefully remembers the host of scholars, who

took a keen interest in his work. He particularly remembers

with gratitude those few teachers and well-wishers, who have

all along stood by him.

The first among these few well-wishers is his father, Prof.

M. Sen, M.A., who first suggested the basic idea of this disser-

tation, and whose insight and enthusiasm have been unfailing

sources of inspiration to him. He acknowledges further his

great indebtedness to his teacher, Dr. M. M. Bhattacherje, M.A. Ph.D., Head of the English Department, Calcutta and Viswabha-

rati Universities, who with kindly and scholarly interest, read through the whole of his thesis and suggested improvements. He

remembers with gratitude the generous encouragement he had received from the late Kaviraja Rakhaldas Kavyatirtha, who

was an institution by himself, the late Dr. S. B. Das Gupta, Ph. D., Prof. K. B. Roy, M.A., Dr. S. K. De, D.Litt. (London), Dr.

Nihar Ranjan Roy, D.Litt., (Paris), Director, Institute of Advanced Studies, Simla, Dr., A. C. Banerjee, Ph.D., Centenary

Professor of International Relations, Calcutta University, Dr. A. Bose, D.Phil. (Oxon), Sir Gurudas Professor of English,

Calcutta University and Dr. R. C. Hazra, D.Litt. (Dacca), Post-Graduate Research Department, Sanskrit College, Calcutta.

The work would never have been completed without their active guidance and advice.

He also acknowledges with thanks the co-operation he received from the management and staff of Venus Printing

Works, Calcutta.

Contents

Pages

Introduction

i-xxii

Chapter I. Myth and Reality : Experience and

Speculative Thought

1-32

Chapter II. Sense-knowledge and Aesthetic Experience

33-94

Chapter III. Concept of Samanya rasa in Alamkara

and Ayurveda

95-124

Chapter IV. Concept of Visuddha-Sattva in Philosophy

and Aesthetics

125-183

Chapter V. Visuddhi in Indian and Greek Analyses

184-232

Chapter VI. Bharata’s Indebtedness to his Predecessors

233-263

Chapter VII. Sattvika-bhavás in Bharata’s Rasa Analysis

264-291

Chapter VIII. Bharata’s Vyabhicharibhavás and their

background in the physiology and

pathology of Indian Ayurveda.

292-344

Chapter IX Philosophy of Aesthetic Enjoyment

345-397

Chapter X. Technique of Achievement of Ideal Samata

398-444

Chapter XI. Rasa-realisation in Indian Analysis

445-468

Chapter XII. Conclusion

469-474

Appendix. I. Date of Patanjali-Caraka and Bharata

475-478

Appendix. II. Doctrine of Katharsis in Aristotle’s Poetics

479-480

Appendix. III. English Translation of Sanskrit and

Pali Passages

481-516

Bibliography

517-524

Index to Books and Authors

525-528

General Index

529-533

Aesthetic Enjoyment

Its Background in Philosophy and Medicine

παλιν δε αρμοττομενης τε και εις την αυτης

φυσιν αποδοσης ηδονην γινεσθαι λεκτεον.

ΦιλΗΒοΣ. 31d.

निर्दोष’ हि सम ब्रह्म

—Bhagavad-Gita. 5. 19

INTRODUCTION

This thesis is not only about Rasa, but also about the sources and origin of the concept of Rasa. There is through-

out this essay an implicit understanding that any broad and significant movement, whether, in art or in philosophy,

cannot be adequately understood, if it be studied separately from the study of contemporary movements in other branches

of knowledge. It is a common assumption in literary criticism and aesthetics, that the sources of literature are

irrelevant or unimportant, and that literature can be completely criticised and appreciated in terms of literaturc.

There was for some time, a similar philosophy about the study of nature—the mechanical materialism of d'Holbach,

adopted unconsciously by most scientists to-day. It was supposed that matter could be completely described in terms

of itself, and since man is made of matter, these terms would describe him as well. This philosophy began by divesting

matter of all those qualities, which have a subjective or mental component—colour, solidity, taste. There is no

place of taste or rasa in this scheme. Mass, size, time and space were regarded as objective material qualities—matter

described in terms of itself.

While mechanical materialism was developing the objective or contemplated aspect of matter, idealism was

developing its active or subjective side. Idealism became the study of sensuousness, and sensing is an active process.

The world as known to man was shown to consist only of sensory qualities—forms, concepts and ideas. In Abhinava-

gupta, one comes perilously close to such a standpoint, where all objective entities are found to be rooted in a subjective

basis.

Mechanical materialism and idealism are not peculiar to philosophy, but are expressed in the science, aesthetics

and history of man. If poetry be approached by a mecha-

nical materialist, in psychology, it will be regarded as a form of behaviour; if by one in philosophy, it will be regarded as

nothing but the gratification of the "aesthetic" sense, inherent in matter organised in a human body. The idealist position

II

is generally regarded as a more suitable approach to poetry, which is then explained in terms of the Beautiful, the True or the Good.

The mechanical materialists of art regard the art work, a poem or a fine piece of sculpture, as the detached object, and attempt to elicit a theory of art, from which the subject or artist is excluded, a theory written in terms of the technique, or forms of the art. It is supposed that when the devices, technique, and “abstract” qualities of the art, which can be examined independently of the artist, have all been extracted and reduced to theory, art will have been described in its own terms. Vamana sums up this attitude to art, when he writes, riti-ratma kavyasya. This stand in aesthetics is the theory of “formalism”, and it is evident that as a theory, it corresponds in aesthetics to mechanical materialism in philosophy. Like these philosophers, the formalists or the followers of riti are left at the end with merely objective realities, with concepts, ideas, schemes and dogmas.

The psychological approach to art of the modern expositors of Rasa theory, like Dr. Das Gupta, Mm. P. V. Kane, Dr. S. K. De and Dr. V. Raghavan, professes to follow the subjective idealism of the great Abhinavagupta. These eminent writers regard the art work as subjective, as the “feeling” in the mind of the appreciator or artist, and proceed to explain the Rasa theory, entirely on this basis. They believe that the aesthetic emotion, or rasa is ultimately final, unquestionable, completely divorced from the world of reality. It is wholly inside them; and any criticism of art is purely personal and subjective.

This splitting up of the subjective and objective attitude to art among the modern expositors of Rasa theory, has very largely obscured the background of the concept of Rasa. The analysis of the modern interpretation of Rasa theory in Sec. II, will indicate how seriously their exposition has suffered from this split, this lack of integration of the different approaches to the question of aesthetic enjoyment.

II

It is interesting to note that this fragmentation and lack of integration among the moderns, who look at Rasa specula-

iii

tions as self-sufficient, independent of large and moving

forces in society and philosophy, is in a sense, a mis-interpre-

tation of the aesthetic position of Abhinavagupta, and not

the legacy of any great Indian philosopher. It is essentially

the result of a deep penetration of European thought and its

very significant influence on modern students of Alamkara.

This influence has been sometimes conscious; but more often,

present day writers on Rasa, like Dr. Das Gupta and Dr. De

have been unconsciously echoing the standpoint of European

aesthetics. The subjective idealism of Abhinavagupta,

divorced from the wider background of his philosophy, also

emphasized the self-sufficiency of Rasa. It would have been

excellent if the present-day expositors had gone back to the

integrated vision of the ancient Greeks, a position very

similar to the one held by Bharata.* But it is a misfortune

that instead of going back either to the ancient Hindus or the

ancient Greeks, they have unconsciously taken up the

attitude of Descartes, when there was for the first time a split

in the integrated vision of ancient philosophy.

Ancient philosophy, whether in Babylon, Egypt,*2 India,

or Greece,*3 shows unmistakably this integrated pattern of

thought. No branch of this integrated pattern of thought

could be well understood, without carefully consulting all

others. Dr. Radhakrishnan rightly observes in his Intro-

duction to “Indian Philosophy” (Allen and Unwin), vol. I.

p. 31 (1948), “It is the synthetic vision of India that has

made philosophy comprehend several sciences, which have

become differentiated in modern times. In the West, during

the last hundred years or so, several branches of knowledge

till then included under philosophy, economics, politics,

morals, psychology, education have been one by one sheared

away from it. Philosophy in the time of Plato meant all

those sciences, which are bound up with human nature, and

form the core of man’s speculative interests. In the same

way in ancient Indian scriptures, we possess the full content

of the philosophic core. Latterly in the West, philosophy

became synonymous with metaphysics, or the abstruse dis-

cussions of knowledge, being and value, and the complaint

1 A Brief Introduction to a Comparative Study of Greek and Indian Poetics

and Aesthetics—R. Sen.

2. Before Philosophy—H. Frankfort and others (Pelican Books).

3. Early Greek Philosophy—Burnet.

IV

is heard that metaphysics has become absolutely theoretical

being, cut off from the imaginative and practical sides of

human nature”.

This disintegration of the unified field of knowledge into

several distinct and independent branches has been contagi

ous, and underlies the Rasa speculations of the modern

expositors. It is useful to remember that the modern attitude

to the world, as either matter or mind, does not go beyond

Rene Descartes. The history of modern European philosophy

begins with Bacon, Jacob Boehme and Descartes. There is a

complete disparity between these first two philosophers. But

both are modern in the sense that they have completely

broken away from the integrated vision of the Middle Ages.

Both agree that mind operates in the content of its knowledge,

as in its own domain, and this consequently appears as

concrete Being. This domain in Bacon is the finite, natural

world; in Boehme, it is the inward, mystical, godly Christian

life and existence; for the former starts from experience and

induction, the latter from God, and the pantheism of the

Trinity. The disintegration which set in with Bacon and

Boehme came to a head with Descartes. With him, the chasm

which had been widening from the beginning of the Rena-

scence, became almost unbridgeable.

The philosophy of Descartes first brought to completion,

or very nearly to completion the dualism of mind and matter,

which began with Plato, and was developed, largely for

religious reasons, by Christian philosophy. The Cartesian

system presents two parallel but independent worlds, that of

mind and that of matter, each of which can be studied without

reference to the other. There is a considerable discussion in

the Meditations, as to why the mind feels “sorrow” when the

body is thirsty. The correct Cartesian answer was that the

body and the mind were like two clocks, and that when one

body and the mind were like two clocks, and that when one

indicated “thirst”, the other indicated “sorrow”.

One immediate result of Descartes’ philosophy was the

re-opening of the question of the relation between soul and

body, that is the return of the object within itself in such a

way that thought posits itself in another, in matter.

Descartes believed that there could be no unity of soul and

body. The former belonged to thought, the latter to exten-

sion; and thus because both are substance, neither requires

the Notion of the other, and hence soul and body are inde-

pendent of one another, and can exercise no direct influence upon one another. Soul could only influence body in so far as it required the same, and conversely—that is, in so far as they have actual relation to one another. But since each is a totality, neither can bear a real relation to the other. Descartes consistently denied the physical influence of one on the other; that would have a mechanical relation between the two. Descartes thus established the intellectual sphere in contradistinction to matter, and on it based the independent subsistence of mind: for in his cogito “I” is at first only certain of itself, since I can abstract from all. The necessity of a mediator to bring about a union of the abstract and the external and individual was felt. Descartes settles this by placing between the two what constitutes the metaphysical ground of their mutual changes, God. He is the intermediate bond of union, in so far as He affords to the soul in what it cannot bring about through its own freedom, so that changes in body and soul may correspond with one another. Faced with the problem of the relation of body and soul, Descartes invented a deus ex machina, who is to solve all such problems. But the dualism of body and mind was never far away from his thought.

Though Cartesianism proved to be a great impetus to science, it undermined for ever the integrated vision of the ancient world. It was no longer possible for any one to take all knowledge for one’s province. An arbitrary distinction grows up between science and philosophy; and every one is a specialist. The fragmented view of art and life was not confined to the particular branch of study, like history or literature. It was carried vigorously to all branches of knowledge, so that it became impossible for a biologist to know the laws of physics, or of mathematics, or for a chemist to know the laws of sociology, or of anthropology. It is not possible to estimate to-day the extent of damage to knowledge, as a result of this fragmentation and specialisation. This explains the great difficulty of understanding the thought-pattern of a different age. It is for this that a great writer like Bharata can never be adequately understood, if he be looked at merely as the first expositor of Rasa theory in Alamkara. To understand Bharata and the full implications of his Rasa theory, he must be looked at as the spokesman of his age.

VI

In granting that Bharata is representative of his age,

it is necessary at the same time, to find out the pattern of

Indian thought in the early Christian era (See Ch. VI for

Bharata’s date). Bharata’s encyclopaedic work unmistakably

shows great influence of the age to which he belonged. The

pattern of thought of a particular age permeates all branches

of speculations, and is the golden chain which binds together

all knowledge of that age. Bharata’s work, which forms a

part of this larger pattern, would be unintelligible, unless it

be read as a representative work of his times.

Each age of philosophical reconstruction and emphasis,

shows certain striking traits, which distinguish it from all

others. Hegel distinguishes three such periods in the history

of European philosophy, each period showing a distinctiive

trait. These periods are, according to Hegel, that of

Greek philosophy, the philosophy of the Middle Ages, and

modern philosophy. “Of these, the first is, speaking

generally, regulated by thought, the second falls into the

opposition between existence and formal reflection, but the

third has the Notion as its ground”4. Hegel thus finds one

characteristic trait, a dominating thought in each of these

three ages.

Dr. S. Radhakrishnan in his Introduction to “Indian

Philosophy”, vol. I. Sec. V, arrived at a similar division of

Indian Philosophy into several periods of thought. The

broad divisions of Indian philosophy are (1) the Vedic period

(1500 B.C.—600 B.C.) covering the age of the settlement

of the Aryans, and the gradual expansion and spread of the

Aryan culture and civilisation. “We discern in it successive

strata of thought, signified by the Mantras or the hymns, the

Brahmanas and the Upanishads. The views put forward in

this age are not philosophical in the technical sense of the

term. It is the age of groping, where superstition and

thought are yet in conflict.”

(2) “The Epic Period (600 B.C.—200 A.D.) extends

over the development between the early Upanishads and the

darsanas, or the systems of philosophy. The epics of the

Ramayana and the Mahabharata serve as the vehicles, through

which was conveyed the new message of the heroic and the

4. History of Philosophy, vol. 1—Introduction (Routledge and Kegan Paul).

Reprinted 1955.

godly in human relations. In this period, we have also the great democratisation of the Upanisad ideas in Buddhism and the Bhagawad Gita. The religious systems of Buddhism, Jainism, Saivism, Vaisnavism belong to this age . . . . Most of the systems had their early beginnings about the period of the rise of Buddhism, and they developed side by side through many centuries”. The Buddhism and the Jainism agreed on one particular point with Saivism and Vaisnavism, a standpoint shared also by the Patanjala system. This is the concept of visuddhi or purification. This might be called the spirit of the times. No wonder that this concept runs throughout the Rasa-speculations of Bharata (See chs. IV and V), who has imbibed the ideas of his age.

(3) The third and the fourth periods are less important from the standpoint of the present thesis. “Of these, the third or the Sutra period (from 200 A.D.) shows a growing development of a critical attitude in philosophy. “The earlier efforts to understand and interpret the world were not strictly philosophical attempts, since they were not troubled by any scruples about the competence of the human mind or the efficiency of the instruments and the criteria employed . . . . . . So when we come to the Sutras, we have thought and reflection become self-conscious, and not merely constructive imagination and religious freedom”. Of all six systems, the Samkhya, as pointed by Prof. Garbe and Prof. Das Gupta, is the oldest. This possibly explains why the greatest debt of Bharata is to the Samkhya, specially to that branch of it, championed by Patanjali and Vindhyavasin (See ch. VI).

(4) The fourth or the Scholastic Period also begins with the second century A.D., “It is not possible for us to draw a hard and fast line between this and the previous one. Yet it is to this that the great names of Kumarila, Samkara, Sridhara, Ramanuja, Madhva, Vacaspati, Udayana, Bhaskara, Jayanta, Vijnanabhiksu and Raghunatha belong”.

This thesis is the first systematic attempt to read Bharata’s Natya-Sastra, and specially the doctrine of Rasa against the background of its age. We have to note that the illuminating discussions of Rasa by such eminent scholars as Dr. S. N. Das Gupta, Mm. P. V. Kane and Dr. S. K. De, are all carried in vacuo, divorced from the main trends of Bharata’s times. It is the firm belief of the present writer

VIII

that the concept of Rasa can be adequately understood, only when it is studied against the background of its age. The proper background of Bharata’s Natyā-Sāstra is the second period of philosophic consolidation, as outlined by Dr. Radhakrishnan. This will explain Bharata’s indebtedness not merely to Patanjala speculations, but also to Abhidhamma analysis (See chs. II, V, VI, VII, VIII, XI), as also to the Bhagavad-Gītā, and the Yuganaddha and Prajno-paya in Buddhism (See chs. IX and X).

III

It is necessary to have a résumé of Rasa theory, as analysed by Dr. Das Gupta, Mm. P. V. Kane and Dr. S. K. De here, for a fuller understanding how the theory, expounded throughout this thesis, differs in certain fundamental and essential points, from theirs. Mm. P. V. Kane in his Preface to History of Sanskrit Poetics (1951) claims that he along with Dr. De "were thus practically pioneers in this field". Mm. Kane substantiates this statement, and writes, "So far as the text and Notes (on Sahitya-Darpana) were concerned that edition (of 1923) was a reprint of the edition of 1910. But I prefixed an Introduction of about 177 pages, dealing with the History of Alamkara Literature. Almost in the same month in which my book appeared, Dr. De published the first first volume of his History of Sanskrit Poetics. The second volume of the latter was published by Dr. De two years later in 1925". Dr. Das Gupta’s Kavya-vicara in Bengali was published as late as 1939. The long article on the history of Alamkara literature by Dr. Das Gupta came out in History of Sanskrit Literature – Classical Period (Calcutta University) only in 1947. Though there is a good deal of difference on points of scholarly interest among these three authorities on Alamkara literature, there is at least agreement on one particular point. It is the paucity of materials about the background of Bharata. What is even more significant is that all these three eminent authorities are content to explain away Bharata’s exposition of Rasa as a rude beginning, not deserving to be ranked as a branch of serious philosophic speculation.

IX

Mm. P. V. Kane in p. 345 of his "History of Sanskrit Poetics" (1951) enumerates the "several works that expound the theory of rasa realisation, such as the Natya-Sastra, vi-vii, with the commentary of Abhinava, the Saraswati-Kantha-bharana V, the Sringara-prakasa, Dasa-rupaka, Sringara-tilaka, Bhava-prakasanam and Rasa-tarangini. It is not possible to describe in detail what all these works have to say, to mark out the points of difference among some of them. Bharata's text being the earliest one I shall rely on that text, and the Abhinava-bharati therein, and briefly set forth the several interpretations of that Sutra". Mm. P. V. Kane admits that his interpretation of Bharata's Rasa-sutra closely follows that of Abhinavagupta. He takes it for granted that Bharata and Abhinavagupta belong to the same philosophic tradition (for a criticism of this view, see ch. IX). This is significant, for it should be clearly recognised that Abhi-navagupta's commentary on the Natya-Sastra, inspite of its brilliance and exhaustiveness, has been very largely responsible for obscuring the proper background of Bharata's Natya-Sa stra (See Chs. VI, IX).

Mm. P. V. Kane gives his own exposition of Bharata's Rasa theory. In p. 346, he writes, "The permanent or dominant moods that may be aroused by a dramatic representation and brought to a state of pleasurable relish are eight, rati (love), hasa (gaiety or laughter), soka, krodha, utsaha (energy or vigour), bhaya, jugupsa (repugnance) and vismaya, . . . . . The resultant aesthetic enjoyment and pleasure are called rasa". Mm. P. V. Kane seems to think that the permanent or dominant moods, which Bharata calls sthayi-bhavas, are themselves pleasurable in nature, a view openly contradicted by the etymology of the word "bhava", which in Buddhist and Patanjala parlance, means "life" or "suffering" (See Chs. II and XI). Mm. Kane also nowhere discusses how it is possible for sthayi-bhavas to become Rasas. He takes it to be axiomatic that stimulated sthayi-bhavas, fed on by vibhavas, at once pass to the Rasa stage.

It may be noted further that Mm. P. V. Kane in p. 354-5, accepts with Bhatta Nayaka that rasa-swada is in the same category with para-brahma-saksatkara. As para-brahma is ananda-maya, so is the apprehension of rasa. But he never attempts to explain how a pleasure which belongs primarily to the laukika plane, becomes transformed into an aprakrita

2

X

nature (see Chs. IV and V). He has again very little to say on

how the sthayi-bhavas are stimulated by vibhava (see Ch. II),

or on how the stimulated sthayi-bhavas pass on to the rasa

stage (see Chs. X and XI), or on how the purified prakrita

sattva comes to reflect the aprakrita visuddha sattva (see

Chs. XI and XII), which is of the nature of Brahman Himself.

It is difficult to accept further Mm. P. V. Kane’s view that

“the Samkhya philosophy had not much influence over

“alamkara”, in face of Bharata’s deep indebtedness to Patan-

jala-Caraka (see Chs. II, IV, VII, VIII, IX, X).

Mm. P. V. Kane also nowhere discusses what according

to him is the nature of aesthetic enjoyment. He simply refers

to Bharata (G.O.S.) vol. I, ch. vi, pp. 288-291, where the

Muni explains why this aesthetic pleasure is called rasa.

“Just as persons who partake of food, prepared with many

condiments (such as jaggery, curds, cardamon, camphor,

marica), taste many flavours and feel pleasure and delight, so

spectators, relish sthayi-bhavas, suggested by various bhavas,

acting, recitation, etc., and enjoy delight, and therefore are

called natya-rasas. The word, rasa, in ordinary life has many

senses, viz. “mercury, sweetness and other flavours, essence,

strong liking, decoction, exuded juice, one of the bodily

dhatus” (Abhinava-bharati vol. I. p. 289), but in kavya and

natya, it has another meaning derived by metaphor from the

idea of tasting or relishing”. The foregoing statement of

Abhinavagupta is full of suggestion, the complete significance

of which is not clear to many people. In the first part of

his statement, Abhinavagupta by referring to the preparation

of food with many condiments, was obviously thinking of the

place of Sakti in Rasa enjoyment (See Ch. II, and Ch. IV).

Abhinavagupta’s reference to the different meanings of Rasa,

seems to indicate the deep embrace of sabda and artha (See

Ch. I, sec. III), as also his awareness of the physiological basis

of Bharata’s Rasa speculations. But Mm. P. V. Kane does

not look beyond what is immediately before him; and

Abhinavagupta’s statement is interpreted in a way, which

is not compatible with the main tenets of his philosophy.

This brings one to the consideration of what according

to Mm. P. V. Kane is the nature of aesthetic enjoyment. The

present writer has proved by overwhelming evidence that the

bliss of aesthetic enjoyment is always of the nature of an

ideal balance or samata. This position is held in Samkhya-

Patanjala, Mahayana and Hinayana systems, the Tantras, as also in the Bhagavad-Gita (see ch. IX). This standpoint offers a complete explanation of the nature of aesthetic enjoyment. But it should be noted that nowhere in his "History of Sanskrit Poetics", Mm. P. V. Kane takes any note of this standpoint in Rasa analysis.

Dr. S. N. Das Gupta generally agrees with Mm. P. V. Kane in his analysis of Bharata's exposition of Rasa theory. In pp. 592-604 of "History of Sanskrit Literature" (Calcutta University, 1947), he sketches the outlines of the theory of Rasa. "We must start the theory of rasa, or aesthetic emotion with Bharata's maxim, vibhavanubhava-vyabhichari-samyogad rasa-nispattih. The meaning of this line has been a subject of much discussion . . . . . . Bhamaha was also acquainted with rasa, as he speaks of Kavya-rasa, with which as a first starting people are to be tempted to study the scriptures.

. . . . . . In the general sense, rasa means taste, rasamaya means tasty, while in the technical sense, it means the well-known dominant emotions, such as the amorous, the ludicrous, the pathetic, the passionate, the heroic, the wonder-producing. the fearful and the repugnant". But Dr. Das Gupta takes no note of how it is that the same word, rasa, is used in speculations of both Alamkara and the Ayurveda (See Chs. I and III), or that there must be a common ground of agreement between certain mental and bodily states, which made it possible for both being called rasas.

In his Kavya-vicara (1939), p. 89, Dr. Das Gupta refers to the paucity of materials, available in Bharata for a full discussion of the theory of Rasa. In his article on the "Theory of Rasa" in "History of Sanskrit Literature" (Calcutta University), p. 594, he overlooks the gulf of time which separates Abhinavagupta from Bharata, and writes, "the real discussion of rasa was started by Abhinavagupta in his commentary on Bharata's maxim of rasa". The attempts to read Bharata through the spectacles of Abhinavagupta, have resulted in obscuring the true background of the Natya-Sastra, much as the attempted explanation of Platonic and Aristotelian doctrines from the standpoint of the Renaissance have led to a very different explanation of certain fundamental concepts, hardly meant by the philosophers themselves.*5

5. A New Interpretation of the doctrine of Katharsis in Aristotle's Poetics — R. Sen (Calcutta Review).

XII

This essay is the first systematic attempt to disengage Bharata's Natya-Sastra from the trammels of his commentators (all of whom belong to different philosophic traditions), and re-instate Bharata, and interpret him against the background of his age.

Dr. Das Gupta does not explain the relation of vibhava to rasa (see Ch. II), or the nature of sthayi-bhavas (see Ch. XI), which pass to the rasa-stage. He has again very little to say on the nature of aesthetic experience (see Ch. IX), or how rasa-realisation is made possible (see Chs. X and XI). It is needless to point out that Dr. Das Gupta is not aware of Bharata's very great debt to Patanjala-Caraka, or how deeply has Bharata been influenced by the Ayurveda (see Chs. VI, VII and VIII). In all these, the present writer is a pioneer, and breaks absolutely new ground, which will help interpret Indian rasa speculations.

Like Dr. S. N. Das Gupta, Dr. S. K. De is also fully conscious that Bharata is not the first exponent of Rasa theory. In his "History of Sanskrit Poetics" vol. 2, pp. 21-22 he writes, "that the rasa-doctrine was older than Bharata is apparent from Bharata's own citation of several verses in the arya and anustubh metres in support of, or in supplement to his own statements; and in one place, he appears to quote two arya verses from an unknown work on rasa". Dr. De goes on to write. "The idea of rasa, apart from any theory thereon, was naturally not known to old writers; and Bharata's treatment would indicate that some system of rasa, however undeveloped, or even a Rasa school, particularly in connection with the drama, must have been in existence in his time . . . . . . The comparative antiquity of such a rasa system in connection with the drama, going back to a time, even earlier than Bharata, cannot be doubted".

But Dr. De is hardly aware that Bharata was not so much drawing upon such an imaginary dramaturgic rasa system, as he was drawing upon the living, contemporary rasa-speculations of Patanjala-Caraka. He shares the popular view that Bharata's work is a crude beginning, and writes, "With Bharata, therefore, we arrive at a distinctly definite landmark of the rasa-doctrine". This definitiveness with Dr. De means little else than a starting point. He does not visualise what may be the sources and origin of this starting point, or the proper background of the concept of rasa.

XIII

In pp. 24-25, Dr. De speaks of how "Bharata himself, like all old masters is tantalisingly simple in his statements; for the subject does not appear to have yet been brought into the realm of scholastic speculation" This clearly indicates that according to Dr. De, Bharata's Rasa speculations have no philosophic foundations, a contention which is refuted throughout this thesis. It will be seen on the other hand, that Bharata sums up a rich philosophic tradition, without a study of which Bharata's Rasa speculations can never be adequately understood.

Coming to the question of Rasa-realisation, and the nature of aesthetic enjoyment, it will be seen that Dr. De has little to say on these very important problems. He repeatedly says (pp. 24, 29, 31) that little can be gathered from the somewhat meagre text of Bharata. He admits on p. 32 that "of the period anterior to Bharata, our knowledge is extremely scanty." The only possible background of Bharata's Rasa-system is, according to Dr. De, the dramaturgic Rasa speculations. On p. 23 he writes, "As Dramaturgy was in the beginning a separate study, from which Poetics itself probably took its cue, the Rasa doctrine, which sprang up chiefly in connection with this study, confined its activity in the first stage of its development to the sphere of dramatic composition and exerted only a limited influence on poetic theories. The importance of this dramaturgic rasa-system must have been somewhat overshadowed by the early dominance, in Poetics proper, of the Alamkara and Riti systems, whose traditions are carried on by two earliest writers on Poetics, Bhamaha and Dandin, both of whom allow a very subsidiary place to rasa in their scheme".

Dr. De's differentiation of natya-rasa from kavya-rasa seems to be arbitrary, and there is no point in "taking into account Bharata's doctrine of natya-rasa as the original source of the doctrine of kavya-rasa, elaborated in later Poetics". The more important question is what is the original source of both natya-rasa and kavya-rasa, which do not differ qualitatively, but do so only in extent and range.* It is felt that it is needless to foist upon a hypothetical dramaturgic

6. A Brief Introduction to a Comparative Study of Greek and Indian Poetics and Aesthetics—R. Sen. Sec. II.

XIV

rasa-system the rasa-speculations of Bharata. It is much better to read Bharata against his proper philosophic background. An intelligible explanation of the doctrine of Rasa is only possible by reading Bharata like this.

In pages 25–27, of his “History of Sanskrit Poetics” vol. 2, Dr. De gives an account of the accepted view of Rasa.

“Although Bharata does not enter into technicalities, he seems to be of opinion that the vibhavas and anubhavas which later theory takes to be essential factors, call forth or evoke rasa; but he is not clear as to what this process of evolution exactly is. He takes bhava as the basis of rasa, and explains it generally as that which brings into existence the sense of poetry, through the three kinds of representation”. Dr. De again writes, “Nothing definite can be concluded from all this except that, in Bharata’s opinion, the sthayi-bhava or the principal mood in a composition is the basis of rasa, the essence of which consists in asvada or relish by the reader or spectator, while the vibhava, anubhava and the vyabhicharibhava awaken this state of emotional realisation or ‘relish’ in the reader’s mind”.

“The original outlines of the theory, however, are accepted as fixed by Bharata”. But Dr. De, excepting the enumeration of the different constituents of rasa, has little to say on the background of the concept of rasa. He repeats the accepted view that sthayi-bhavas are transmuted into rasas. But he has nothing to say how this transmutation is effected in poetry and drama. A detailed analysis of this question will be made in Ch. XI of the present dissertation, where for the first time, an explanation is offered of how it is that bhava, which is not free from rajas and tamas (see Chs. II and XI) is raised to the Rasa stage. Speaking of sthayi-bhavas, Dr. De writes, “By the sthayi-bhava in poetry and drama are meant certain more or less permanent mental states, such as Love, Grief, Anger or Fear. This permanent mood, constituting the principal theme of a composition, and running through all other moods like the thread of a garland, cannot be overcome by those akin to it, or those opposed to it, but can only be reinforced. These elements which respectively excite, follow and strengthen (if we may use these expressions) the sthayi-bhavas, are in poetry and drama, known as vibhava, anubhava and vyabhicharibhava, corresponding in ordinary life (as opposed to the extra-ordinary

world of poetry) to the mundane causes and effects (laukika-

kārana and kārya)".

Dr. De makes the bare statement that the sthayi-bhava, when accompanied with vibhāva, anubhāva and vyābhichāri-

bhava, passes to the rasa stage. It will be seen that starting with sthayi-bhava, there are four distinct stages, culminating

in Rasa. It is absolutely necessary that for a proper under-

standing of the theory of Rasa, each of these four stages should be analysed in detail. When such a detailed

investigation is carried out, as has been done in the present

thesis, it will be seen that these investigations clearly point

to the proper background of Rasa. Such an investigation

in the case of vibhāva has been made in Ch. II; in the case

of sattvika bhāvas in Ch. VII; and in the case of vyābhichāri-

bhāvas in Ch. VIII. The analysis of the physical characteris-

tics of both sarīra and manasa rasas is made in Ch. II, and

the sthayi-bhāva itself has been analysed in Ch. XI. All

these unmistakably point to the philosophic traditions of

Patanjala-Caraka, Hīnayāna and Mahāyāna Buddhism, and the Tantras as the proper background of Bharata's

Nātya-Sāstra (vide Appendix I).

The foregoing analysis of the exposition of Rasa theory

by Dr. Das Gupta, Mm. P. V. Kane and Dr. S. K. De, raises

a very strong presumption that Bharata's Nātya-Sāstra re-

quires much fuller study by subsequent scholars; and

Abhinavagupta's brilliant commentary on it has blinded his

admirers as to the true significance of Bharata's Nātya-

Sāstra. This is particularly so, because Abhinavagupta

belongs to a very different philosophical tradition from his

master, Bharata. It shall be seen in Ch. IX how Abhinava-

gupta's analysis of Rasa offers a complete and consistent

account of this much discussed problem in aesthetics. But

this is no reason why Bharata's own characteristic utterances

and philosophic position should be overlooked, and Bharata

himself should be looked upon as “tantalisingly simple” (De),

ignoring his rich philosophical background. The task of

the present writer has been complicated by long-continued

neglect in recognising the background of Bharata's Nātya-

Sāstra, and the continued efforts at reading Bharata, divorced

and isolated from all philosophical questions, and his back-

ground in Ayurvedic speculations on Rasa (vide Chs. II, VI,

VII, VIII).

XVI

All attempts to read Bharata through the spectacles of Abhinavagupta, are thus fraught with great dangers, leading to the obscuring of the parent text. The present thesis is the first serious and systematic attempt to disengage Bharata from the trammels of his commentators, and is an analysis of what Bharata himself stood for. In disengaging Bharata from his commentators and expositors, great reliance has naturally been placed on the philosophic background of the age, to which Bharata belonged.

The period of philosophic integration to which Bharata belonged is the Epic period (600 B.C.—200 A.D.), accepting the four-fold division of Indian philosophy, as suggested by Dr. Radhakrishnan (See Sec. II). The dominating thought of this age is, as has been already noted, the concept of visuddhi, an idea which gives the clue to the essence of aesthetic enjoyment. Speaking of the common ideas, shared by all six systems of philosophy, Dr. Radhakrishnan says that these are acceptance of the validity of the Vedas, a protest against the scepticism of the Buddhists, and recognition of the great world rhythm. Other common traits shared by many schools are the concept of jivan-mukti. Indian philosophy recognises as obligatory unselfish love and disinterested activity, and insist on citta-suddhi (cleansing of the heart) as essential to all moral culture (Indian Philosophy, vol. II. Introduction, pp. 25-27).

It will be seen that Bharata acknowledges the validity of the Vedas (see Ch. VI), but does not protest like other Hindu systems, against Buddhism. Bharata’s analysis of the concept of visuddha-sattva is very close to the analysis of visuddhi in the Seko-desa-tika (G.O.S.) (See Ch. IV). His analysis of the essence of aesthetic enjoyment is strikingly similar to the analysis of Yuganaddha and Prajnopaya in Buddhism (See Ch. IX). All these clearly indicate that the sources of Bharata’s inspiration were not as antagonistic and hostile to Buddhism, as other orthodox Hindu systems are. It is well known that of all six orthodox Hindu systems, Patanjala is the least hostile to Buddhism. Indeed, there are traces in the Yoga-sutra, Kaivalya-pada, which misled certain European scholars into thinking that this last section was a later addition (See Ch. VI). This explains how it is possible for Bharata, being a disciple of Patanjala-Caraka,

XVII

to draw upon both Hindu and Buddhist sources (See Chs. II. IV, V, IX and X).

The age of Patanjala represents the great spring-tide of philosophic spirit in India. It is to this period, as noted by Dr. Radhakrishnan, that the religious systems of Buddhism, Jainism, Saivism and Vaisnavism belong (See Introduction Sec. II). Bharata who stands at the end of this Epic period, naturally imbibed the ideas of his age; and attempts to read Bharata, without taking into consideration the influence which his age exercised on him, are sure to mislead and misinterpret the Natya-Sastra.

The present writer claims to be the first to make a systematic attempt to read Bharata's Rasa-speculations against the background of his age. There is more point in studying Bharata's Rasa-speculations, than those of any other, for the simple reason that Bharata being the father and the originator of Rasa theory in Alamkara, has left a deep impress on all later speculations. It will be necessary to reconsider the whole question of Rasa, when Bharata is looked upon not as an isolated phenomenon, but as the representative and spokesman of his age. In pursuing this search of the background of Bharata's Rasa-speculations, it has been found necessary to set aside the theory of Alamkara Rasa, (rasavad alamkara), as suggested by Dr. Das Gupta, or the theory of dramaturgic rasa as suggested by Dr. De, or again the theory of rasavad alamkara, as emphasized by Mm. P. V. Kane (History of Sanskrit Poetics. 1951, p. 341), as the source of Bharata's Rasa.

IV

There is another very weighty consideration, which makes it necessary to re-open the question of Rasa-realisation in Alamkara. Most writers on Rasa (including Dr. Das Gupta, Mm. P. V. Kane and Dr. S. K. De) look at Rasa-speculation as a distinct branch of study, and reserve for it a high place, aloof from all physical speculations. But it is felt that this attitude goes against the fundamental teachings of both Hindu and Buddhist philosophy. In the early comprehensive vision of the Hindus and the Buddhists,

3

XVIII

there was no sharp differentiation between body and mind, between nama and rupa, or between the physical and the psychical plane. The modern reader, very largely under the influence of Descartes, has learnt to look at body and mind as two distinct and separate entities. This attitude which is nowhere to be met in early Indian speculations, has made it impossible for the modern reader to appreciate the true significance of Bharata.

In the integrated and comprehensive outlook of the ancient Hindus, both body and mind appeared to be under the operations of the same laws. They are not exclusive of each other, but one is being invariably influenced by the other. It was easier for one, brought upon the traditions of Patanjala, to speak of mental operations, like bhava and rasa, purely in terms of bodily experience. Bharata has extensively borrowed from both the Yoga-sutra (see Chs. VIII, and XI), and the Caraka-Samhita (see Chs. II, VI, VII, VIII and IX), simply because he suffered from no such inhibition, which looks at body and mind as utterly distinct entities.

It will be seen in Ch. II, how Bharata, like Caraka-Patanjala and Abhidhamma speculations, looks at sabda and rupa in the form of vibhavas as ahara. It will be noted further that this position is exactly parallel to the ahara, taken in by the mouth, which goes to replenish the supply of bodily rasas. The indriyartha-indriya-samyoga which is the starting point in the case of both sarira and manasa rasas, provides the common ground on which the speculations of rasa in Ayurveda and Alamkara meet.

It should be noted further that the Samkhya philosophy, as also other systems of Indian thought, have recognised from very early times a direct correspondence between the five jnanendriyas and the five karmendriyas. The five jnanendriyas are caksu, karna, nasa, jivha and tvak, each of them taking in sense impressions as ahara. The analogy of food and drink, so frequently used by alamkarikas from Bharata onward, to describe rasa enjoyment, also emphasizes this aspect of rasa; ahara taken in by jivha on the one hand and caksu and karna on the other, alike contribute to the growth and development of rasa.

The other standpoint, which is implicit throughout Rasa speculations is more significant. It is that each indriyartha is related not merely to one jnanendriya, but also

to one karmendriya, so that a natural relation is established between a jnanendriya and a karmendriya. The jnanendriya,

caksu is related to the karmendriya pada, as the jnanendriya,

karna is linked with the karmendriya, vak. So nasa is related to payu, as jivha is to upastha. Tvak naturally goes

with pani. Arranged in a tabular form, the above scheme would appear as follows.

Jnanendriya Caksu Karna Nasa Jivha Tvak

Indriyartha Rupa Sabda Gandha Rasa Sparsa

Karmendriya Pada Vak Payu Upastha Pani

It is not very easy to find corroborative evidence in support of this standpoint. But there is at least enough

evidence to show how the jnanendriya, jivha which lies at the root of all bodily rasas in the Ayurveda is intimately

related to the karmendriya, upastha. It will be seen in Ch. IX how the upastha is associated with the essence of

aesthetic enjoyment in Alamkara. This standpoint antici-

pates by more than two thousand years the recent findings of Sigmund Freud, that all mental emotions and complexes

are of a sexual nature. The Indian standpoint on this particular question has been discussed in detail in Ch. IX, where

it has been found that Rasa enjoyment proceeds out of an ideal samata, which transcends both masculinity and feminity

in human nature.

Caraka holds that the jnanendriya, caksu is intimately associated with the karmendriya, pada. In Sutra-sthanam.

5. 32, Caraka writes,

…… …पादाभ्यंगनिषेवनात् ।

जायते सौकुमार्यञ्च वलं स्थैर्यञ्च पादयोः ।

दृष्टिः प्रसादं लभते… … … … …'(1)

Mahamahopadhya Gangadhara Kaviraja commenting on this, writes, drstiprasadam labhate, ityartha tantratare hetu-

rucyata. “caksusi prati-baddhe dve sire pada-gate nrinam.

Atas-caksu prasadarthee—padabhyangam sama-caret”. So jnanendriya caksu and karmendriya, pada go together.

Just as this is true of caksu and pada, so also it is true of karna and vak. The indriyartha of the jnanendriya, karna

is sabda. This sabda is produced by the karmendriya, vak.

It is easy to see how the jnanendriya, karna naturally goes

XX

with the karmendriya, vak, because the indriyartha which brings these two together, is the same, namely sabda.

So there seems to be a natural affinity between the jnanendriya tvak and the karmendriya, pani. The seat of the karmendriya, pani is the hand, the mouth and the beak or the lips. All these are intimately associated with the jnanendriya, tvak. Caraka in Sutra-sthanam. 5. 28-30, speaks of how regular taking-in of gulps of oil in the mouth improves the complexion, and makes the skin beautiful. Caraka writes,

नित्यं शिरसि हृद्यं शिरःशूलं न जायते । न खालित्यं न पालित्यं न केशः प्रपतन्ति च ॥ (2)

The karmendriya, pani and jnanendriya, tvak, being both of them dependent on the mouth, are naturally related to each other.

The affinity between the jnanendriya, jivha or rasana and the karmendriya, upastha is of immediate importance to the present dissertation on Rasa. The particular provinces of these two speculations about Rasa in Alamkara and Ayurveda, seem remote from each other, having little in common between them. It may be noted that while Rasa in Ayurveda is exclusively dependent on ahara (see Ch. II), Rasa in Alamkara is purely on the psychical plane and is of the nature of Bliss itself. It will be seen that this bliss or ananda is essentially the result of the achievement of an ideal samata (Ch. IX), between all the contending elements which undermine human personality. An epitome of this ideal bliss is granted to man in the form of sexual union, where man finds his fulfilment in his counterpart, woman (Ch. IX). In holding that Rasa in Ayurveda is the source and origin of Rasa in Alamkara, Bharata was only re-emphasizing the traditional position, that the jnanendriya, jivha and the karmendriya, upastha are intimately related with each other.

There is ample evidence in ancient literature to show that the Hindus had clearly recognised the validity of the position that jivha and upastha always go together. Caraka speaks in Cikitsa-sthanam 2., of the different kinds of food and drink, taken in by the mouth, which improve the virility of the male. In the same chapter, Caraka discusses the

XXI

necessity of taking in rich meals, if a man is to enjoy pro-

longed sexual intercourse with his wife.

The intimate relationship between the jnanendriya,

rasana and the karmendriya, upastha has been referred to

again and again in the Srimad Bhagavad. There is much

reason to believe that Bharata was fully aware of this posi-

tion, when he compared rasa-realisation in kavya and nataka

as being of the same nature as food and drink, tasted by the

tongue. The Srimad Bhagavad in Skandha. 7. ch. 6. sloka 3,

speaks of this intimate relationship between the jnanendriya,

jivha and the karmendriya, upastha. The Bhagavad writes,

उपास्थ्य-जैहव्यं वहु मन्यमानः ।

कथं विराज्यतें दुरन्तमोहः ॥

"How can one, who thinks highly of the pleasures of the

sex and of the palate, get over these addictions?" The

Srimad Bhagavad in Skandha 7. ch. 15 sloka 18, is even

more specific. The sloka reads like this.

Santusta kena ba rajan na vartetapi barina

Aupasthya-jaihvya-karpanyad-griha-palayate jana.

The Bhagavad means by this that man lives in the world: His

body and mind are both contented, like those of a dog. The

pleasures of the body are derived through pleasant food and

drink, tasted by the rasana; the pleasures of the mind are

through sexual intercourse, and the attendant enjoyment. It

should be noted further that whatever pleases the palate is

a rasayana, and a very good stimulant of the sexual urge.

There are traces in the extant Natya-Sastra, which

clearly indicate that Bharata must have been fully aware of

this subsisting relation between jivha and upastha, or

pleasures of the body and pleasures of the mind. The

famous analogy of food and drink, to which Bharata refers

in the course of his exposition of Rasa-theory in ch. 6 has

got three important aspects, all very important for an

adequate understanding of Rasa. But not one of these

aspects has been taken any note of by Dr. S. N. Das Gupta,

or Mm. P. V. Kane, or by Dr. S. K. De. The three stand-

points from which this very famous analogy can be looked

at are first how it is that Bharata speaks of the pleasures of

the palate in connection with mental emotions. Why Bharata

should have compared psychical Rasa to physical Rasa, and

XXII

drawn extensively on the Ayurvedic speculations, should at once become clear from the above consideration.

The second standpoint implicit in Bharata’s analogy has been worked out at length in Ch. II. It is the standpoint-

of āhāra. It has been found that Rasa of the body and Rasa of the mind, being both dependent on āhāra, have a natural

affinity between them.

The third standpoint, implicit once again in the analogy, is the concept of sakti; and this has been worked

out at length in Chapter I. This is again the concept of visuddha-sattva, fully developed in Chs. IV and V. So

starting from the analogy used by Bharata to explain the nature of Rasa-enjoyment, it will be seen how all these three

distinct standpoints are implicit in Bharata’s short and cryptic statement. These once again lead to the final analysis of

the philosophy of aesthetic enjoyment in Chs. IX, X and XI.

It will be noticed after a careful study of the present work, that the scope of this thesis is very different from the

standard works on the subject, by such eminent scholars, like Dr. S. N. Das Gupta, Mm. P. V. Kane, Dr. S. K. De,

and Dr. V. Raghavan. While the merits of their work are undeniable, it has been felt that their approach is exclusive,

cut off from the main trends of Bharata’s times. The present study is not opposed to what they have to say on

the field of their specialised investigations. It is on the other hand, complementary to their studies, bringing in new

materials, standpoints, all of which are noticed for the first time here. In thus widening and broadening the scope of

investigations, the author has principally depended on the integrated philosophic thought of the age of Bharata. It

is hoped that these supplementary studies will shed significant light on one of the most discussed topics in Indian

Alamkāra, and necessitate the reconsideration of the background of the concept of Rasa.

CHAPTER I

Myth and Reality: Experience and Speculative thought

The study of the evolution and development of concepts is highly interesting. This is particularly so, because concepts far from being static, are dynamic and go on developing through the ages. A good deal of the misinterpretation of concepts and ideas is to be accounted for by their being taken as fixed and stationary entities. It is possible to look at any concept whether in art and literature, or in religion and philosophy, from two distinct standpoints. In most cases, these two standpoints are very different. It is because the history of the evolution of many concepts is shrouded in mystery. Much useful work is being done to-day towards the unravelling of the mysterious beginnings of certain concepts, which have dominated the thought of primitive man. The first standpoint might be called the historical standpoint. This is the standpoint of tathya. Certain primitive ideas, facts of everyday experience, superstitions and beliefs, codes of conduct and ways of life are uppermost in the minds of the common man. These elements are the first to appear in the social life of the people. The superstructure of philosophic thought of a later date, is built on the foundations provided by these speculations of primitive man, and furnishes the standpoint of tattva. It is an attempted rationalisation of everyday experience. In most cases, experience and philosophic thought are so inextricably mixed up, that it is almost impossible to separate one from the other.

Speculation—as the etymology of the word shows—is an intuitive mode of apprehension. This does not mean, of course, that it is mere irresponsible meandering of the mind, which ignores reality, or seeks to escape from its problems. Speculative thought—or the standpoint of tattva—transcends experience, but only because it attempts to explain, to unify, to order experience. It achieves this end by means of hypothesis. If the original sense of the word be remembered it will be seen that speculative thought attempts to underpin the chaos of experience, so that it may

reveal the features of a structure—order, coherence and

meaning.

Speculative thought and the subject-matter of the

present dissertation is the exploration of the background of

Rasa speculations—is therefore distinct from mere idle

speculation in that it never breaks entirely away from

experience. It may be “once removed” from the problems

of experience, but it is connected with them in that it tries

to explain them. The greatest handicap from which most

of the later writers on Rasa speculations seem to suffer, is

that they have completely lost sight of the bases of specula-

tions in facts and experience. Their speculations have

become more and more scholarly, while the speculative

thought of early writers on Rasa, was not remote, but firmly

rooted in concrete experience.

Speculation has its place in the scheme and pattern of

philosophy. But without the facts of experience before it,

it becomes remote, a useless toy. Again, experience, if it

be not studied in the light of mature wisdom, loses all its

significance, and becomes chaotic. It is useless to examine

which standpoint is more important, the standpoint of tathya,

or experience, and the standpoint of tattva, or philosophic

thought. It is necessary that for the complete understand-

ing of any concept, it should be studied from both these

standpoints. The analysis of the sources and origin of a

particular concept is as important as the philosophic

interpretation of it, made necessary by maturer thought.

An attempt has been made in the present study, to find out

the historical background of the concept of Rasa, as also to

arrive at an intelligent philosophic interpretation of it.

I

It is possible to arrive at an intelligent explanation of

certain gods and goddesses, if it be remembered that they

are also the result of a happy blending of facts of ordinary

experience, and philosophic interpretation and speculation.

Different stories about the goddess Laksmi, are told in the

Puranas. It is said that the Lord Manu had married the

goddess, Satarupa, the daughter of Rudra. Two sons,

Priyabrata and Uttanapada, and two daughters, Prasuti and

Akuti were born to this goddess, Satarupa. Daksa married Prasuti and had twenty-four daughters born to him by Prasuti. Out of these twenty-four daughters, thirteen including Laksmi were given in marriage to Dharma. The other eleven were married to Bhrigu, Bhava, Marici and eight others (Visnu-Purana I. 7. 14-26 ; Padma-Purana Sristi-Khanda, 3. 183). Laksmi gave birth to a son, Darpa. The Visnu-Purana notes further, that Bhrigu had two sons, Dhata and Vidhata, and a daughter, Laksmi by his wife Khyati. Laksmi, the daughter of Bhrigu, was married to Lord Narayana. It follows from both these accounts that Laksmi is either the daughter of Daksa by Prasuti, or the daughter of Bhrigu by Khyati.

The Puranas again speak of the appearance of Laksmi from the ocean. The sage, Durbasa begged a divine garland from a Vidyadhari; it was granted to him by Lord Indra. This garland, symbolical of Laksmi, was slighted by Indra. Durbasa cursed Indra that his residence, Trailokya, the three worlds, would be without Laksmi (pranasta—laksmlka). The triloka, being thus without Laksmi, the gods became enfeebled, and were routed by the asuras, and banished from the heaven. The gods with Brahma, worshipped Lord Visnu. Lord Visnu advised them to churn the ocean. Goddess Lakshmi came out of the ocean, as a result of this churning. The sages worshipped the goddess, muttering Sree-sukta; the gandharvas sang in chorus; the apsaras like Ghritaci danced; the river, Ganges came and attended on her; the elephants (= dig-gaja) took up golden vessels, and bathed the goddess by pouring fragrant waters; the Lord of the sea gave her a garland, which never fades; and the Lord Viswakarma himself fashioned the ornaments for her. The goddess, thus decorated and delicately perfumed, took her seat in the breast of Visnu.

The Puranas attempt a reconciliation of the stories of the appearance of Laksmi from the ocean, and of her being the daughter of Bhrigu and Daksa. The Puranas hold that the appearance of Laksmi as the daughter of Bhrigu or of Daksa, is her second appearance. The Visnu-Purana definitely holds that just as the Lord of Lords, Janardana repeatedly appears in the forms of avatars, so also does his consort, Laksmi. When Hari became Aditya, then Laksmi appeared again from the lotus; she is Sita, when He is

Raghava; She is Ruksmini when He is Krisna. She assumes

a divine shape when Her Lord is divine. She is of this

world, when Her Lord is one of flesh and blood (Visnu-

Purana. 1. 9).

It must have been noted further that the Puranas very

often describe Laksmi in a way, which shows a clear

deference to popular sentiments. There is little or no

attempt to rationalise such descriptions in the light of philo-

sophic speculation, or tattva. The Puranas give expression

to popular sentiments in beautiful poetry. The Brahma-

vaivarta-Purana writes that the Sakti in Mula-prakriti, one

who is of the nature of Suddha-sattva (See Chs. IV and V),

is the consort of Lord Visnu. She is Laksmi. She is the

goddess of wealth. She is beautiful, calm and quiet, bene-

factress of mankind, and without any greed or stupor, anger

or desire. She loves those who are devoted to their

husband. She herself is devoted to Her Lord. She is the

beginning of all things; she is the source of love and delight;

she speaks kindly, and is an ideal wife. She represents the

fertility of the earth (See also ch. VI), and as such, she is

the life of all living beings. She is Maha-laksmi. In

Vaikuntha, she serves Visnu; in Swarga, she is Swarga-

laksmi. She is the Raja-laksmi in the king's palace. She

is Griha-laksmi in every household. She is like the Sobha

of everything. She is the splendour of the king. She is

like the wealth and merchandise of the merchant (Brahma-

vaivarta. Prakriti-khanda. I. 22-30). The description of

Laksmi at one stage in the Visnu-Purana may not have

much philosophical importance, or tattva. But it shows

great awareness and sensitiveness of the world of reality,

or tathya. It is said that Goddess Sree is the universal

mother (Brahma-vaivarta. I. 8. 15-32), and does not change.

She is all-pervasive like Her Lord. Visnu is artha, she is

bani ; Visnu is naya, she is niti. Visnu is bodha, she is

buddhi; Visnu is dharma, She is sat-kriya. Visnu is srasta,

She is sristi. He is bhu-dhara; She is bhumi; The Lord is

kama; She is iccha. Visnu is yagna; she is daksina. Laksmi

is idhya, the Lord is kusa. The Lord is sāma, she is the tune ;

Laksmi is swaha, Vasudeva is the sacrificial fire. The Lord

is Sankara, She is Gauri; Kesava is the sun, She is His rays.

Govinda is the ocean, Sree is the shore; Laksmi is jyotsna,

Hari is the lamp. The universal Mother, Sree is the creeper,

the universal Lord is the tree. Sree is night, the Lord is day.

The Lord is the husband, the goddess is His bride. The Lord

is Raga, She is Rati. It is in this way, that popular imagina-

tion saw in Hari the personification of the male element, and

in Laksmi, the emblem of womanhood (Brahmā-vivarta I. 8.

15.32).

Looked at from the standpoint of tattva, or philosophic

speculation, it will be seen that all the Puranas attempt a

harmonisation of conflicting tendencies, and arrive at a

unified vision of reality. This unification in the case of

Radha is more of a popular nature, showing little aware-

ness of a deep rooted philosophical conviction. In the

history of Indian religious thought, such systematic think-

ing, leading to a harmonisation between different specula-

tions about the nature of reality, is to be met with in the

Bhagavat Gita. The Purusattoma-vada of the Bhagavat

Gita manifests itself in its various forms in the Puranas. It

appears that from the standpoint of tattva, there is not much

of difference in the Vasudeva tattva of the Panca-ratra, or

the Parama Sivatattva of the Kasmir Saivism, or the

Bhagavad-tattva in the Puranas, or again the Purusattamo-

tattva, discussed in the Bhagavat Gita. It is difficult to

say if there had been any common origin or starting-point

of all these speculations. It is the standpoint of tattva,

attempting to harmonise the conflicting view-points in the

world of tathya.

II

If it be true of Laksmi and Narayana, it is no less true

of the concept of other gods like Indra or Siva. In the

evolution of the concept of such gods or goddesses, experi-

ence of the facts in daily life has got inextricably mixed up

with speculations of a later date, so that it is difficult to

distinguish between speculation and reality. The Vedas

unquestionably acknowledge the supremacy of the Lord

Indra. Different rsis have composed many hymns in praise

of Indra in different ages. Some of the hymns to Lord Indra

in the Rg-veda are pretty old, some again are comparatively

modern. Lord Indra is the chief deity in the Rg-veda. He

has been universally associated with the onset of rains from

very early times. This analysis of the evolution of the

concept of Indra from what was originally a form of nature-

worship, seems to have left its trace on Bharata’s Natya-

sastra. It will be remembered that plays could only be

staged by first invoking Lord Indra.

Coming to the analysis of the concept of Indra, or

Indra-tattva, it will be seen that the ancient Hindus saw in

every natural phenomenon, the manifestation of its presid-

ing deity. There is such a presiding deity for vayu, agni,

jala or akasa as also of prithvi. There is little agreement

among scholars about what gods are the presiding deities of

which particular natural force or phenomenon. In explain-

ing the nature of the Vedic gods, some have emphasized the

astronomical phenomenon in the distant skies; some again,

have given prominence to clouds, rains, lightning and

thunder, and other natural phenomena as underlying the

concepts of different gods and deities. Max Muller thinks

that sun-rise and sun-set, daily rotation of the earth, leading

to day and night, and such other phenomena lie at the back-

ground of most mythology. The theology of the Vedas is

to be explained from the standpoint of Vedic mythology.

Prof. Wuhn, on the other hand, has emphasized the import-

ance of such natural phenomena, as the rising of the clouds,

the flashing of lightning, peals of thunder and blowing of

storms in his interpretation of the Vedic deities (Science of

Language—Max Muller. 1882. vol. II. pp.565-566). Prof.

Keith in his “Religion and Philosophy of the Veda and

the Upanishads” (1925) holds a similar view that the origin

of Lord Indra can be explained, when it is remembered

how very important were such natural phenomena as rains

and lightning to primitive man.

The Rg-veda enjoins worship of Mitra, Varuna and

Dyaba-Prithvi as personified deities and imagines the

presence of a living spirit, permeating all nature. It be-

came an instinct with primitive men, to offer homage to

these deities, presiding over all natural phenomena. Dis-

cussing the philosophical basis of the Vedic-gods. Max

Muller writes, “The Vedic poets spoke not only of rain

(Indu), but of a rainer (Indra), not only of fire and light as

a fact, but of a lighter and burner, an agent of fire and light,

a Dyaus (Zeus) and an Agni (ignis). It seemed impossible

to them that sun and moon should rise every day, should

grow strong and weak again every month or every year.

unless there was an agent behind who controlled them . . . .

The process on which originally all gods depended for their

very existence, the personification of, or the activity attri-

buted to the great natural phenomena, while more or less

obscured in all other religions, takes place in the Rig-veda,

as it were in the full light of day. The gods of the Vedic,

and indirectly of all the Aryan people, were the agents

postulated behind the great phenomena of nature.*1

This is the factual, material background in tathya of

the great gods in the Vedas. In “A General Index to the

Names and Subject-Matter of the Sacred Books of the

East”, compiled by M. Winternitz, and edited by Max

Muller (Oxford, 1910), the factual basis or the tathya of the

evolution of the Vedic Gods, is again discussed at length.

Of the deities, indexed in the book, Agni and many others

are discussed from several standpoints. In Sec.(e), Max

Muller discusses the anthropomorphic conception of Agni (his

body, his food and drink, his chariot and horses, his wives

and children). In Sec.(f), he discusses the theriomorphic

conception of Agni, and his relations to animals. Both

conceptions are from the standpoint of tathya. Of the

numerous references to the anthropomorphic and the

theriomorphic conception of Agni (and Agni is not an

isolated case), only a few may be referred to here. The

bricks of the fire-altar are the limbs of Agni. vol. 41.*2

p. 156; Agni has three heads and seven rays (or reins).

vol. 46. p. 167, 168; he has got many faces (the fires). vol. 46.

p. 103, 248, 280; the face of Agni is turned everywhere.

vol. 46. p. 125; Agni eats with his sharp jaws, he chews,

he throws down the forests, shears the hair of the earth.

vol. 46. p. 54, 61, 129, 173; and there are many more

references to the anthropomorphic conception of Agni. The

theriomorphic conception of Agni and his relations to other

animals occupy an equally important part in the specula-

tions of the Hindus. Agni is an animal, vol. 41. p. 342,

361, 363, 399, etc., Agni shakes his horns, like a terrible

beast. vol. 46 p. 142. Agni is the strong bull, or vrishan,

1 Six systems of Indian Philosophy—Longmans, Green and Co. (1916).

2 Sacred Books of the East.

vol. 32. p. 144, 146; vol. 46. p. 137, 142, 147, 167. It must

have been noticed that in whichever way one looks at the

origin and development of the Vedic deities, anthropomorphic

or therionomorphic, there is a background of these deities in

facts of ordinary experience. This passage from the physical

to the metaphysical, from the material to the spiritual, from

the world of experience to the ruling principle governing it,

is a characteristic trait of the Indian mind. This standpoint

is of great significance in understanding how in Rasa specu-

lations, concepts which are purely physical and physiologi-

cal in origin, were transferred to the metaphysical and

psychical plane.

But if the interpretations of the Vedas by Prof. Mac-

donell and Prof. Keith are to be accepted, it would mean that

the ancient Hindus were out and out, animists. The Hindus

on the other hand, were hardly believers in large natural

phenomena, without any divine superimposition. The sun

worship of the ancient Hindus is not merely the worship of

the largest visible phenomenon before them. But there was

the imposition from very early times, on the lifeless matter

of the sun, the spirit and impulse of the living god, Vivasvan.

The Hindus distinguished between worship of dead matter

and worship of the presiding deity. The sun-god in the

ancient sun-temples, has been conceived as one, clad in golden

harness, with sandals, as in the case of Greek god, Apollo.

It shows clearly that there was the necessity even in early

times, of the recognition of a definite form for the presiding

god, who himself is invisible. An idol, embodying the

excellences of the presiding god, was substituted for the god

himself. Gods, representing large natural forces, decayed

and were substituted by invisible gods in the speculative

imagination of man. Lord Indra, who was in all probability,

an emperor of this world was thus transfigured into the King

of Heaven, and the earthly empire of Ilabritavarsa melted

into thin air and was substituted by Heaven. Once the gods

become invisible and inaccessible, many qualities came to

be attributed to them. The upgrading of different gods from

primitive speculations can be explained in this way.

Prof. A. S. Geden writing on the Hindu conception of

Nature*33 points out how all nature gods are strongly

33 Encyclopaedia of Religion and Ethics, ed. by Hastings, Vol. IX. p. 229.

9

'anthropomorphic. "Perhaps in no other early religion is

the 'natural' element so clearly revealed, or the material

origin so little obscured by pessing into the divine." Sir

S. Radhakrishnan sees the physical origin of most of the

Vedic gods. He discusses further how in "the conception

of Rta, there is a development from the physical to the

divine."*4 Again, "the Maruts are the deifications of the

great storms so common in India, when the air is darkened

by dust and clouds, when in a moment the trees are stripped

of their foliage . . . and the rivers are lashed into foam

and fury.*5 Sir S. Radhakrishnan says how with the advance-

ment of thought from "the material to the spiritual, from the

physical to the personal"*6, it was possible to conceive of

abstract deities. Rasa-speculation in Indian Alamkara has

been looked upon for the last thousand years, as if, it is

purely abstract and metaphysical. But abstracting is only

intelligible when it is rooted in concrete and substantial

basis; and metaphysical analysis is little else than an extension

of physical speculations.

In "Religion and Philosophy of the Veda and Upani-

shads" (Harvard University Press, 1925) Prof. A. B. Keith

discusses at length the evolution of the nature gods and

abstract deities. Prof. Keith accepts the broad division of

nature gods from the standpoint of (a) anthropomorphism

(b) theriomorphism and (c) animalism and abstract deities.

On p. 58, Keith writes, "The degree of anthropomorphism

exhibited by the Vedic deities is extremely variable. In

some cases, the active element is constantly present, and the

view taken may be set down as almost animalistic. On p. 59,

Prof. Keith analyses the concept of the Vedic god, Indra.

Though Indra is "primarily in all probability the thunder-

storm, which brings down the rain to earth, one of the

greatest of India's natural phenomena", he is "a god who has

in considerable measure been emancipated from his connec-

tion with the phenomena, which produced the conception."

In discussing great aerial gods in ch. 9, Keith gives first

place to Indra. In p. 126, Keith writes, "His connection with

the sun and the fire suggests his fiery character. But the

4 Indian Philosophy. Vol. I. p. 79.

5 Indian Philosophy. Vol. I. p. 88.

6 Indian Philosophy. Vol. I. p. 89.

10

myth of the slaying of Vrtra, which is the great deed of the

god, is not doubtful in sense. It takes the form of the slaying

of the god with the aid of Maruts and of Vishnu, or without

their aid, of a serpent which was lying on the mountains,

keeping in with its coils the waters of the streams. The flood

of the waters flows then swiftly to the sea, and at the same

time the light shines forth. The god strikes Vrtra on the

back, or smites his face, or pierces his vital parts. In

p. 61-2, Prof. Keith arrives at the general conclusion that

"most of the Vedic nature deities are normally conceived

as anthropomorphic."

Sir S. Radhakrishan in his analysis of the hymns of the

Rg-veda7 refers to the remark of Lucian. "What are men?

Mortal gods. What are gods? Immortal men." Following

Max Muller and A. B. Keith, S. Radhakrishnan speaks of

Indra as "the god of the atmospheric phenomena, of the blue

sky. He is the Indian Zeus."8 "His naturalistic origin is

clear. He is born of waters and the cloud. He wields the

thunder-bolt, and conquers darkness. . . . Gradually Indra's

connection with the sky and the thunder-storms is forgotten.

He becomes the divine spirit, the ruler of all the world and

all the creatures . . . The god of the thunder-storm

vanquishing the demons of drought and darkness, becomes

the victorious god of battles of the Aryans in their struggles

with the natives."

Sir S. Radhakrishnan writes9 while discussing the

theology in the hymns of the Rg-veda,9a "The religion of the

undeveloped man, the world over, has been a kind of

anthropomorphism . . . . . Naturally we project our own

volitional agency and explain phenomena by their spiritual

causes. We interpret all things on the analogy of our own

nature and posit wills behind physical phenomena . . . . .

It is a sort of polytheism where striking phenomena of

nature, of which India is so full, are deified. . . . . . He

hears the voice of god in the tempest and sees his hand in

the stilling of the wave. Naturalism and anthropo-

7 Indian Philosophy (Allen and Unwin) 1948. Vol. I. p. 85.

8 For an analysis of the naturalistic origin of Zeus, see Pre-historic

Religion.—E. O. James.

9 Indian Philosophy—Vol. I. p. 73-4.

9a Dr. Raja in his lectures on the Vedas does not fully accept this anthro-

pomorphic interpretation of the Vedic gods.

morphism seem to be the first stages of the Vedic religion.

Looked at from the standpoint of tathya, it is similarly

possible to find out the elements, which entered into Mother

worship, a cult which spread throughout India. It has been

pointed out by a school of anthropologists and sociologists

that the cult with all its heterogeneous and theological

fabrications may be regarded as a contribution to the complex

texture of the Hindu religion and culture, mainly, if not

solely, by the pre-Aryans, or the non-Aryan aborigines.

They hold that the major portion of what is known to-day,

as the Sakti-cult, or the Mother cult of India, developed

when the social, cultural and religious admixture among

the Aryans and the aboriginal non-Aryans, was almost

complete. The Vedic religion, they contend, is characterised

by a predominance of the male gods, where mother goddesses

may be said to be almost conspicuous by their absence.

This, they hold, is mainly due to the prevailing patriarchal

system in the Indo-Aryan society. Some again have held that

traces of the mother goddess as a consort of the father god

(Siva) are found in the Indus Civilisation, by which is the

probable pre-Aryan civilisation hypothetically constructed

on the finds of Harappa and Mohenjodaro. Accepting this

working hypothesis, that there existed at least in some parts

of India, a rich pre-Aryan civilisation, it has been suggested

that the nucleus of the mother goddess is to be found in

female figurines, some supposed to be images of the Earth-

goddess, and some the protoform of the later wrathful

goddess—Mother Kali. About the supposed Earth-goddess,

it has been said, by Sir John Marshall, "Now, it is well

known that female statuettes, akin to those from the Indus

Valley and Baluchisthan have been found in large numbers

and over a wide range of countries between Persia and the

Aegean, notably in Elan, Mesopotamia, Transcaspia, Asia

Minor, Syria and Palestine, Cyprus, Crete, the Cyclades,

Balkans and Egypt". (Mohenjodaro and the Indus Civilisa-

tion. vol. I. p. 50). The obvious suggestion is that this

probable mother goddess of the Indus valley presents no

isolated history of Mother worship, but indicates the

existence of a widespread religious belief.

It will be hazardous under the existing conditions of

our knowledge to assign to that hypothetical non-Aryan

civilisation the origin of the Mother Cult of the Indo-

Aryans. Possibly, the matriarchal structure of society had a great deal to do with the development of the religious consciousness and practices, gathering round the Mother Cult. No body will be so orthodox as to refuse recognition of the contribution of the aboriginal and other pre-Aryan races to the development of the Mother Cult of Hindu religion.

From the point of view of the evolution of Mother worship, the most important goddess seems to be the Earth-goddess, who has been invoked as the "Great Mother". It has to be noted that when Mother Earth is invoked or entreated, she is seldom praised alone, but is inseparably related with Father Heaven (Dyaus), yet it has to be admitted that the greatness and grandeur of Mother Earth commanded reverential praises from her sons, with whom the offering of song was real worship. "Great is our Mother Earth" (Rig-veda. I. 168.33) was the exclamation of the Vedic poets.

Father Heaven and Mother Earth were invoked to bestow on man a luxuriant growth of crops, food and riches ; they were invoked to redeem them from all great sins and also to vouchsafe prosperity, happiness, valour, progeny and longevity. They were entreated to protect the people in war, and it was added, "Let not Mother Earth get angry with us at any time". All motherly feeling, tender affection, generosity of heart and forbearance were attributed to Mother Earth, of whom the poets were proud to be the children, and the vastness, variety, resourcefulness and fertility of Mother Earth find innumerable patterns of expression.

A further development of this idea of Mother Earth is to be found in the hymn to the Earth of the Atharva-veda (12.1.1-18), where it is said, "Truth and greatness, the right and the formidable, consecration, penance, Brahmin (Supreme) and sacrifice sustain the Earth ;

... She (the Earth) bears the herbs of various potency—let the Earth be spread out for us, be prosperous for us. On her are the ocean, the rivers—the waters ; on her all food and plough-fields ; on her flourish those that breathe and stir ; . . . . let that Earth grant us all prosperity. The immortal heart of this Earth, covered with truth, is in the highest firmament—let that Earth assign to us brilliance, strength, in highest royalty. On her the circulating waters flow the same, night and day, without

failure—let that Earth yield us milk, then let her sprinkle

us with splendour. . . . Earth is Mother, I am Earth’s

son . . . . Thou hast become great, a great station, great

is thy trembling, stirring, quaking ; great Indra defends

thee unremittingly. Do thou, O Earth, make us shine forth

as in the aspect of gold ; let no one soever hate us’.

The idea of the Sky-Father and the Earth-Mother may,

however, be said to be a common feature of all the ancient

religions. Fertilising of the Earth-Mother by the Sky-

Father through the rains is a common belief, acquiring a

religious significance almost from the dawn of human

civilisation. It is not surprising that Kamakhya (with

Cherapunji in the neighbourhood), has been called the

yoni-pitha.

In the Aitareya Brahmana (8.5), the Earth is identified

with Shri ; in some of the later upanishads also, the Earth

has been identified with the goddess Shri or Laksmi, the

goddess of harvest and fortune. As the goddess Shri, the

earth has been praised as the sovereign goddess, and

homage has been paid to her. In the Puranic literature,

the earth has frequently and variously been described as a

power or sakti, associated with Visnu (cf. Bhu-devi). In

the sculptural representation of the Gupta age, Visnu seems

to retain something of the old Vedic Sun-god, and Shri and

Bhu may stand for two aspects of the Earth-goddess, the

aspects of prosperity and productivity.

In spite of the myths and legends that shroud the

origin of Durga in the Puranas, and in spite of the

philosophic grandeur she acquired, the paraphernalia of her

worship that are prevalent in India—and particularly in

Bengal—betray an amalgam of the Puranic goddess with

the Earth-goddess. To be brief, only a few striking features

may be mentioned. The first is that the annual worship of

the mother goddess in her various aspects, begins in autumn,

which marks the beginning of the harvest season in Bengal.

To the common run of people in Bengal, the goddess Durga

is popularly known as the autumnal goddess. In the

autumnal worship of the goddess, her first representative

is the branch of a bilva tree, in which the goddess is to be

first awakened. In the next stage, the representative of

the goddess is the Navapatrika, or something like a female

figure, made with a plantain tree and eight other plants and

herbs. In the worship of this Navapatrika, hymns are sung

in praise of all the plants and herbs separately, identifying

the mother goddess with each of these plants and herbs.

The Mother has often been worshipped as one with paddy

(dhanya-rupa), the staple food of a substantial portion of the

Indian sub-continent. An epithet of Durga is Shakambhari,

which means, "the herb-nourishing goddess". She is wor-

shipped also as Annapurna or Annada, which means the

goddess of food. During the spring, she is worshipped as

the Spring goddess (Basanti Debi). In the autumnal worship

of the goddess in the form of Laksmi, the goddess of harvest

and fortune, the Navapatrika is taken in some parts of

Bengal, as the best representative of the goddess and, as a

matter of fact, is worshipped as the goddess herself. All

these will go to prove how the Mother, in later times, was

identified with the harvest goddess and the goddess of

fertility, who again is nothing but a particular aspect of

Mother Earth.

It should have been noted that Prithivi is not the only

mother goddess in the Vedic literature. The other prominent

mother goddesses in the Vedic literature are Aditi, Saraswati

Shri, Debi, Ratri, Ambika, Uma and Durga. It is generally

supposed that the wide-spread prevalence of mother cult in

Eastern India is to be accounted for by the presence of the

non-Aryan matriarchal society in these countries. Mother

worship and Sakti cult are hardly Vedic. These are to be

traced to the non-Aryan structure of society, and the

honourable place of women in it.

Whatever may be the value of this anthropological

finding, there are other evidences in support of this conten-

tion. An analysis of the evolution of religious thought*10 of

man indicates that things which are socially valuable and of

great utilitarian interest, gradually come to acquire almost

a religious sanctity. The social mind grows and develops,

by centering itself round certain concepts. This, in its turn,

comes to acquire a sacredness, an unimpeachable authority

as in religious practices. There is a clear evolution of

religions. The emergence of the mother cult in India can

10 Comparative Religion — Bouquet (Penguin).

15

perhaps be explained, if it be remembered that in non-Aryan society, polyandry was widespread. The father being very often unknown, the children were largely dependent on mother, and were known by her name. The children being dependent on mother, the mother came to be looked upon as the centre of society. Some men again think that the economic life of these non-Aryan tribes was exclusively dependent on agriculture. It is well-known how women played a very big part in sowing seeds, harvesting, and winnowing. This again might have led to the great importance of women, and the rise of mother cult in primitive society.*11

What seems to be beyond doubt is that roughly between the beginning of the Christian era and the tenth century A.D. many local and indigenous goddesses pushed themselves from the social sub-strata to find a place in the Hindu pantheon, and by a process of generalisation, both religious and philosophical, were fused together and treated as aspects of the one universal mother goddess. It is not, therefore a fact, as is sometimes wrongly conceived, that the many mother goddesses are later emanations from the one mother goddess; on the contrary, the one mother goddess of the Puranic Age, seems to be a consolidation of the many mother goddesses — a consolidation brought about by the philosophy of Sakti.

This is the standpoint of tathya. But in the philosophy of Sakti, we find the standpoint of tattva. In the primitive condition of society, the mother held the most important position; and thus the cosmic mother became the most important deity. In India, from the age of the Indus Civilisation of Mohenjo-daro and Harappa down to the present time, the father God is represented by the linga (the male symbol), and the mother Goddess by the yoni (the female symbol). This representation of Siva-Sakti by the linga-yoni is a popular religious practice in India, and in most of the ancient and modern temples of Siva, the twin are worshipped in their symbolic representations. In the Tantra literature, (both Hindu and Buddhist), the Lord (Bhagavan, the male deity) is symbolically represented by a white dot (sweta-bindu), thus suggesting the likeness with semen, while the Creatrix (Bhagavati, the female deity) is

11 Social Evolution—Gordon Childe.

16

represented by a red dot (shona-bindu), to suggest the analogy, with the menstrual blood containing the ovum.

From the speculative side, it was observed that every-thing that existed, existed by virtue of its power or powers.

So God, who exists as the Creator, preserver and destroyer of the universe, must possess infinite power through which He creates, preserves and destroys the universe.

In fact, His very being presupposes infinite power by virtue of which He Himself exists.

This belief in the power of God is a universal belief; but what is important to remember is that this power or universal energy is something like a female counterpart of the possessor of this power.

This power or sakti, being conceived as a counterpart of the possessor of Sakti, came to be regarded as the consort of the possessor.

This is because not only among the Saktas (believers in Sakti in whatever form as the supreme deity), but in almost all other religious sects—the Saivas, the Sauras, the Ganapatyas and the Vaisnavas,—an important place is occupied by Sakti.

There is seldom a god or a semi-god, or a demi-god of India of the Puranic Age, for whom a consort has not been conceived as the inseparable Sakti.

The same has been the case with all the gods, the semi-gods and demi-gods of later phase of Mantrayana Buddhism.

A strong belief in the philosophy of Sakti, has brought about a popular synthesis among contrary philosophical standpoints of Samkhya, Vedanta, Vaisnavism and Tantricism (See also Chs. IV and V).

It was thus possible to make a synthesis of Patanjala standpoint and Pratyabhijna analysis from the standpoint of Sakti.

But for the philosophy of Sakti, it would have been impossible for a believer in Advaita standpoint like Abhinavagupta to interpret the typically dualistic Patanjala standpoint of Bharata.

(See also Chs. VI and IX).

The Samkhya speaks of Purusa and Prakriti as two independent and ultimate reals, whose interaction is, in fact, mere attribution resulting from the accidental contact of the two.

In the Puranas and similar other popular religious literature, Prakriti is plainly conceived as the female counterpart of Purusa, and as such the two reals have been practically identified with Sakti and Siva of the Tantras.

Just in a similar manner, the principle of maya (illusion) of Vedanta has been conceived as the Sakti of Brahman.

These pairs have again been identified with Visnu and his Sakti, Laksmi

or Sree, with Rama and Sita, and still later, with Krishna and Radha. Thus in the popular religious belief of India, Siva-Sakti of the Tantras, Purusa-Prakriti of Samkhya, Brahman-Maya of Vedanta, and Visnu-Laksmi, Rama-Sita and Krisna-Radha of Vaisnavism all mean the same thing.

This is the the philosophy of sakti, or the standpoint of tattva. This philosophy of Sakti is clearly suggested by two passages in the Brihad-aranyaka Upanishad (I. iv. 1, 3), where it is said that in the beginning was the Cosmic Being as the Atman (Soul) in human form, who could never feel happy (i.e. enjoy himself through any process of self-realisation), for He was all alone. So He desired a second to Him. His being was something like a neutral point (See Chs. IX and X), where the ultimate principles of the male and the female lay unified in a deep embrace, as it were. This unified being divided himself into two—as the male and the female which formed the first pair, and all the pairs of the universe, are said to be replicas of this original pair. These passages of the Brihad-aranyaka Upanishad have been extensively made use of in the Puranas, in the Tantras, as also in the later Buddhist and Vaisnava Sahajiya schools, in which the idea of Sakti played an important part. Whatever has been created in this phenomenal process, has been created from the union of the two—energy and matter, the consumer and the consumed. They represent the two aspects of the one non-dual truth—one internal and the other external,—one illuminating, unchangeable and immortal (amrita), and the other obstructive, gross and perishable; the one the cause-potency and the other the effect potency. In the Saiva and Sakta tantras, prana-rayi of the Prasna-Upanishad (I. 4), or agni-soma stand for Siva-Sakti—the primordial male and female (See also Ch. X).

It should be distinctly understood that Rasa enjoyment always presupposes the philosophy of Sakti. No enjoyment is possible without Sakti. (See Ch. IV): There are clear indications that Bharata himself was aware of the place of Sakti in Rasa realisation. The Sadhaka by steadfast meditation focusses the attention on Krisna or Kama. These become manifest and are held fast in the forehead of the sadhaka. Krisna murti becomes of the nature of sthayi-bhava. So it follows that sthayi-bhava, which underlies all Rasa-realisa-

18

tion, is the result of Sakti-sadhana.*2 Through this sakti-

sadhana, the anandamsa of the soul manifests itself.

It should be noted further that Bharata is referring to

the part played by Sakti, when he speaks of Rasa-enjoyment

as the enjoyment of different ingredients, like honey and

spice, which enter into the making of soups and drinks. In

soups and drinks, the presence of each of these ingredients

is felt, over and above its general taste. It is because there

is the presence of Sakti in this varied and distinctive flavour

of each of these different ingredients. But Brahmananda is

unalloyed pleasure, purest delight. This delight is not

variegated, because sakti, which colours and makes manifold

the One, is absent (See Ch. III). Rasa-enjoyment is not

through the renunciation of Sakti ; it is always through a deep

embrace with Sakti. This Sakti is of the nature of Visuddha-

sattva. It will be seen throughout Chapters IV and V how

the concept of Visuddha-sattva has dominated Indian Rasa

speculations.

The way of Rasa-realisation is not the way of renuncia-

tion or vairagya, but is essentially a line of transformation,

transmutation and sublimation. It is for this that there is a

place for Sakti in Rasa enjoyment. Sthayi-bhava and

Visuddha-sattva, the two cardinal tenets in Rasa analysis

(See Chs. II and XI for sthayi-bhava and Chs. IV and V for

Visuddha-sattva) as also the analogy (referred to by Bharata

and accepted by all later Alamkarikas without exception) of

Rasa as very similar to panaka-rasa, all point to the accept-

ance by Bharata of the philosophy of Sakti, without which

Rasa enjoyment would have been impossible.

Looked at from this standpoint, it will be seen that it is

possible to arrive at the roots of speculative thought of the

ancient Hindus. But these roots are held fast in the world

of reality. A clear analysis will reveal that this mode of

thinking characterises not merely theological speculations,

but almost all branches of philosophic thought. Man

naturally proceeds from experience in the everyday world

of reality, and passes on to the realm of speculative thought.

These two worlds are not so remote and separate, as they are

12 For a good exposition of Sakti-sadhana, centering round bsakti, Dr.

Bhagavati Prasad Sinha's Rama-bhakti me Rasika Sampradaya

(Balarampur) may be consulted.

sometimes supposed to be. These interpenercate each other,

so much so that it is impossible to understand one without

knowing the other.

The aim of the present thesis is to explore the world

of reality, the field of tathya, on which rests the Rasa tattva

of the ancient Hindus. It will be seen how deeply and

thoroughly had Bharata been influenced by Indian Ayurveda.

This thesis also attempts for the first time to arrive at a

generalised aesthetic theory of Rasa, and to find out its

essence and philosophical background (Chs. IX and X). In

the last chapter, an attempt has been made to show how these

two lines of speculation, the tathya about Bharata’s very

great indebtedness to Ayurveda (Chs. II, VI, VII, and VIII)

and the standpoint of tattva (Chs. IV, V, IX and X) are

essentially linked up, and the two together present a complete

and adequate theory of Rasa.

III

One of the most deep-seated instincts in man is to see

in the world of reality the manifestation of something, which

lies beyond it. It is useful to remember this at the very

outset; for it might appear revolting to many orthodox

scholars that Rasa of the mind is essentially the same as

Rasa of the body. It should be noted on the other hand, that

such a line of thought, instead of appearing remote and

antique, was part of the speculative thought-structure of the

ancient Hindus. This is what is known in the Puranas, as

divi-arohana, or ascension of ordinary ideas to high heaven,

or the realm of speculative thought.*13

Just as god appears in the world as man, so also good

man by a reverse process, or pratiloma kriya, is being trans-

formed into god. There are many instances in the Vedas,

where good and generous man is invested with a godly life.

The logic of this pratiloma analysis seems to be as follows.

At the beginning, good men are worshipped and adored; but

they are no more than man. In the next stage, he attains the

13 For an analysis of Assumption and Ascension, see Dr. J. Bernard’s

article in Encyclopaedia of Religion and Ethics. Vol. 2. p. 151-2.

20

state of goodliness. Last of all, he becomes a luminous star in

the heavens. So Indra was at the beginning a man; then he

becomes a god; and in the last place, he became the sun.

It is difficult to give any rational interpretation of many of

the Rk-vedic suktas about Indra, unless such an interpreta-

tion be accepted. After the ascension into the heavens from

the earth, the qualities of man, god and luminous planet are

intermixed with one other, making it extremely difficult to

give any interpretation from any one particular standpoint.

Indra is worshipped as man, god or a luminous planet; or

all these concepts in varying proportions and shades inter-

mix with one another, making the concept of Indra extremely

complex. So also Krishna is a mortal man; and Krishna is

god; and Krishna is the sun. Dhruba is a man; he is also a

luminous star. Vishnu granted Dhruba a boon that his

mother should become a luminous star, and exist for an

equal period in the sky with Dhruba. Dhruba himself was

granted the boon that he was to live above all the seven

wise sages, who have been changed into stars. The Vishnu-

Purana writes,

Saptarsinam—asesanam ye ta Vaimanika Sura.

Sarvesam—upari sthanam tava dattam maya Dhruba.

(I. 12, 92, 94). The Visnu-Purana calls this the ascension

of Dhruba to the heaven.

Dhrubasya arohanam divi (I. 12. 101).

To a careful reader, there are traces of this divi-arohaṇa

even in Bharata's Natya-sastra. It should be noted that the

Sukla-Yajur-Prati-Sakhya from Adhya I. Sutra, 130 to

Adhya VIII. Sutra. 30, discusses swara, varna, akhyata. In

Adhya, VIII, Sutra. 31, the “varna-devata” or the presiding

deities of the different colours are enumerated. The Sukla-

yajur-Prati-sakhya, 8.32, writes, “agneyya kantha” meaning

thereby that the presiding god of the different varnas, arising

out of Kantha, is agni. So, Niriti is the presiding deity of

the varnas, arising out of the root of the jivha; and soma or

the moon is the presiding deity of those varnas, which pro-

ceed out of the lips (Ibid. 8.37).

Immediately after this, in 8.49, the gotras of the

different padas and in 8.51, their devatas are named. All

these clearly point out that the philosophic outlook of the

Hindus, wants to discover under all phenomenal changes, the

ruling principles. This standpoint characterises Indian

thought from time immemorial. The presiding gods of

varna, swara and pada were conceived as early as the

Upanishadic age; but the seeds of such a line of thought can

be traced earlier still. The Rk-veda enjoins worship of

Mitra, Varuna and Dyaba-prithivi as personified deities, and

imagined the presence of a living spirit as permeating all

nature. It became an instinct with primitive man to offer

homage to these deities, presiding over all natural pheno-

mena. This passage from the physical to the metaphysical,

from the material to the spiritual, from the world

to the ruling principle governing it, is a characteris-

tic trait of Indian mind. This standpoint is of great signi-

ficance in the understanding of how in Rasa-speculations

concepts which are purely physical and physiological in

origin, were transferred to the metaphysical and psychical

plane.

It will be remembered that Bharata in Ch. 6. Slokas

44-5, speaks of following presiding deities of the eight

rasas. These are,

Sringaro Visnu-devatyo Hasya Pramatha—daivata.

Rudro Rudradhidevasca Karuno Yama-daivata.

Vibhatsaya Mahakala Kaladevo Bhayanaka.

Vira Mahendraдева syad-adbhuta Brahma daivata.3

Sarangadeva in Sangita-ratnakara (Adyar ed.) vol. I. p. 96

similarly speaks of the presiding deities of the seven swaras.

Sarangadeva writes,

bahni-brahma—saraswatya sarva—sreęsa—ganeswara.

sahasramsu riti prakta kramat—sadjadi—devata..4

Bharata's enumeration of the presiding deities of the

different Rasas differs slightly from the enumeration of

Sarangadeva. But the conformity more than the difference

is of very great interest; for it clearly indicates how deeply

the concept of divi-a-rohana had permeated Indian thought.

This line of speculation, which looks at god as a glori-

fied man, or at man as a diminutive god, seems to knit

together the speculations of Alamkara and Ayurveda. In the

speculations of early man, the inward is inalienably asso-

ciated with the outward; just as the outward is essentially

the same as the inward. There is nothing wrong in such a

standpoint.

In the Gifford Lectures for 1891, Max Muller discusses

22

this question of the divine and the human relations.14 In

p. 353, he discusses the principle of apotheosis. "This idea

of apotheosis or deification of man, as it meets us in many

parts of the world, may seem very strange to us. . . . . It is

to all intents and purposes a transitio in alterum genus.

Nay, if there are two genera, which seem completely to

exclude one another, they are those of gods and men. . . . .

Yet from very early times we saw how both Greeks and

Romans had accustomed their minds to the idea, that a man

may become a god. That gods may assume the form of

man, and even appear to man disguised in human shape,

is more intelligible. . . . . But to conceive that human

nature could ever be changed into divine nature, requires

an effort that seems at first" impossible. In p. 364,15 Max

Muller discusses the three roads leading to the discovery

of something divine in man in ancient Greece.

In p. 364 of his "Anthropological Religion", Muller

discusses the three roads leading to the discovery of

something divine in Man. Confining his attention to

Greece, he finds these three roads to be (1) ancestor wor-

ship, (2) Mythological belief in human heroes, as the

offspring of Zeus, and (3) the third road started from a

belief in divine powers, called Daimones. In the specula-

tions of early man, the physical and the metaphysical are

one ; the inward is inextricably associated with the out-

ward.16 It will be seen throughout the present thesis how

in Rasa speculations, a purely physiological and pathological

standpoint is effectively used by Bharata to explain the

intricacies of psychological evolution. It might almost be

said that there is a parallel to this divi-arohana in Bharata's

Rasa analysis. Bharata must have been unconsciously

thinking of some such concept, when a purely physiological

and pathological standpoint was used to explain the nature

of aesthetic enjoyment. A corroborative evidence in this

direction is to be found in Bharata's analysis of the adhi-

daivata of the different Rasas.

A further proof of Bharata's awareness of this divi-

arohana seems to be noticeable in his recognition that

14 Anthropological Religion—Muller.

15 Ibid. p. 364.

16 The Idea of the Holy—Otto Rudolf (London. 1943).

23

Rasa-enjoyment is essentially an enjoyment of Sattva. This is the considered opinion of all Alamkarikas, and writers on Rasa. Rasa enjoyment, which is physical and physiological in origin, is sublimated into an enjoyment, which has affinities with the enjoyment of Brahman Himself (Sahitya-Darpana. III. 2). There is no denying the fact that the Rasa-enjoyment is lokuttara ; while Rasa of the body is confined essentially to this loka. But this is to be explained from the standpoint of avatara-tattva, a reverse process of divi-arohaṇa-tattva. In p. 354 of his "Anthropological Religion", Max Muller discusses the underlying unity of the principles involved in apotheosis of man, or apanthroposis of god. Both are attempts at bringing the two worlds closer together. Prof. A. S. Geden*17 discusses how some nature gods are the result of the deification of notable men and women of the present or past ages. It is, as it were the nature of that Perfect Being is momentarily flashed on the surface of the purified sattva of the reader and the audience. The divi-arohaṇa tattva, if Rasa enjoyment be looked at from the standpoint of bodily rases and dhatus, or the avatara tattva, if Rasa enjoyment be looked at from the standpoint of aprakṛita visuddha sattva (Chs. IV and V), will explain how it is that a speculation which began purely on the laukika plane was gradually admitted to the precincts of high philosophy. Of these two, the aprakṛita visuddha sattva standpoint demands closer scrutiny, for it appears that Bharata himself favoured this interpretation of Rasa. It is evident from his repeated references to visuddha sattva as characterising Rasa enjoyment (ch. 7. p. 95 Banaras ed.). It must not be understood thereby that Bharata was not aware of the divi-arohaṇa tattva. This is clear from Bharata's analysis of the adhi-daivatas of the different Rasas. In fact, there is not much of difference between the two standpoints, one being complementary to the other.

IV

A fact, which has to be carefully remembered, and which set the present writer on the quest of the background

17 Encyclopaedia of Religion and Ethics. Vol. IX. p. 229.

of Bharata's Rasa speculations, is how it is that the same

word "rasa" has been used in both Alamkara and Ayurveda.

'This is particularly important, because the philosophy of

Indian grammar has always discouraged indiscriminate

formation and use of sound to signify similar or cognate

sense.*18 In other words, Indian grammar would not have

permitted the use of the same word, rasa, in both cases, had

not there been a fundamental unity of outlook.

In analysing the concept of Sabda-artha, it is necessary

first of all, to find out the philosophy of nada. This nada is

the first causal sound; this is the logos; this is the "word"

in the Bible. Siva-Durga, Brahma or Narayana are all

transformations, and made out of this first causal sound or

nada. The Tantras speak of this nada as Kamakala, Kali or

Kundalini. The Samkhya calls this the Prakriti. The

Nyaya-Vaisesika calls this paramanu, without death or decay;

the Purva-Mimamsa calls this apurva; and the Upanishads

or the Vedanta speaks of this as prajna, avyakta or Iswara.

This is nada Brahman or the eternal sound.

The Brhajjavala Upanishad speaks of the five faces of

Siva. It is held that five mahabhutas, and five primal colours

proceed out of these five faces. The creative forces are Agni

and Soma, or the Sun and the Moon (See ch. X). The

Brhajjavala Upanishad writes, "Sivagnina tanum dagdhva

saktisomamrritena ya". Siva burns everything to ashes; but

Sakti brings all back to life by drenching them with nectar.

From the standpoint of the emergence of sound or

nada, it should be noted that sound becomes first manifest in

the anahata stage. This is the result of unimpeded vayu.

This is from the face of Siva, known as tat-purusa. The bija

sound at this stage is "a" sound. The bija mantra of this

stage is "u" sound. This is the manipura cakra. The next

stage in the formation of sound is sadayajata. The bhuta

corresponding to this stage is the prithivi, and its cakra is

mula-dhara. The bija mantra of this stage is "ma" kara. It

is at this stage that the primal sound prepares itself for

manifestation. The fourth stage is the stage of Nada itself.

This is presided over by Vamadeva. This takes place at the

swadhisthana cakra. The mukha which was turned eastward

18 Linguistic speculations of the Hindus.—Chakrabarti (Calcutta University

in the tat-purusa, south-ward in the aghora, westward in the sadyajata, is now turned northward in the vamadeva. Here for the first time, Nada manifests itself.

But this Nada must pass further through the stages of bindu and Kalā before it enters Kalātita. At the bindu stage, Iswara is the presiding deity. The Yoga philosophy holds that disturbed vayu in different parts of body, produces sound. So all sounds are the result of disturbance; and this takes place primarily at the Swadhisthana stage.

Nagesa in the Manjusa, p. 171 has made an attempt to explain the origin of vak with reference to cosmogony. After the annihilation of the cosmic world, accompanied by a complete cessation of all actions, the creative function (maya), he maintains, is finally absorbed in the infinite consciousness. When the Supreme Being feels the necessity of creation, His potentiality takes the form of a bindu — a subtle point retaining in itself, immense power, and combining the three gunas. This is, in reality, an inexhaustible source of energy (sakti-tattva). The unconscious part, or inertia is called bija, the part representing a mixture of both cit (consciousness) and acit (unconsciousness) is known as nada (sound), and the intelligent element generally goes by the name of bindu. Regarded as the ultimate source of all forms of vāk, this nada is called sabda-Brahman. The tantrika descriptions of vāk, as are to be met in the Sarada-tilaka and other treaties, have a striking similarity with this view. Bindu, nada and bija are all said to represent the different aspects of the one and the same thing. It is further stated that they stand for the trinity of godhead, having its manifestations in fire, in the moon and in the sun.

In accordance with the Tantrika conception, bindu is a symbol of the seminal principle, while nada means a dis-semination of energy (Sakti), and it is out this combination that the world is said to have been created.

It should be remembered that this evolution of sound may further be looked at from the standpoint of sphota. The sphota-vadins hold that at the background of all sound, there is one changeless, indivisible, sphota without any krama. Pronounced sound is only representative of it. This being one and changeless without any mutation, is sabda-brahma. But it must not be forgotten that though at the background of sabda, there is one changeless sphota, on the plane of

26

ordinary existence, this changeless sphota undergoes changes, and gives rise to other sphotas. The nitya-sphota may be without any krama. But it is possible to find a sequence in the dhvani, which proceeds out of this nitya-sphota. The unmanifest stages of this emerging sound, are known as (1) para, (2) pasyanti, and (3) madhyama. The stage where sound has already manifested itself, is known as (4) vaikharī.

This classification of vāk into four different kinds, is to be met also in the Rk-veda, I. 164.45. This Rk. speaks of four different kinds of vāk, though it does not definitely mention their names, and it distinctly lays down that it is the last and fourth form of speech, which is spoken by men, the other forms lying latent, i.e. too subtle to be uttered by our vocal organs. Patanjali has explained catvari vak-parimita padani as what refers to the four categories of grammar, namely, noun, verb, preposition and particle (Mahabhasya. I. i. 1). But later grammarians, like Bhartrhari and Nagesa as well as philosophers like Gaudapada and Sayana found in this particular expression a clear reference to the four well-known divisions of speech, viz. para, pasyanti, madhyama and vaikharī.

Guha nihita, as explained by Nagesa, seems to be quite in agreement with the tantrika point of view. Guha means, he holds, the three innermost parts of the body, namely muladhara, navel region and the heart (Manjusa. p. 182), and he goes on to say that the first three types of speech are not comprehensible to everybody. The Yogins with their inward vision revealed, are only competent to realise these mystic forms of speech. A grammarian of the type of Patanjali and Bhartrhari is also supposed to have visualised these subtle things by dispelling the darkness of ignorance through the aid of their illuminating knowledge of sabda-sastra. The vaikharī is, however, distinguished from the rest by being perfectly audible, and capable of being expressed through the medium of letters. This is the popular form of speech current in human society. It is at this stage that there is a split between sabda and artha.

Sabda and artha are so closely connected with each other that one cannot be conceived without the other. While describing the mystic way in which the Highest Godhead is united with His Supreme power—a union which is often represented as the association of parama purusa with parama prakriti, or that of Siva and Sakti, Kalidasa could not think

of a more appropriate similitude than the relation between

sabda and artha (Raghu-vamsa. 1.1.)

What does the utterance of a word bring with it? When

a word is uttered, says Bhartrhari, three things, namely, the

particular word, the intention of the speaker and the object

that is denoted, are all comprehended at a time (Vakya-

padiya. 3.1). A sound that does not fulfil this condition, i.e.,

fails to present before us this trinity of things, is meaning-

less. Prof. Dittrich has discovered three elements in a

statement; the sound, the import and the actual fact. Unless

we recognise some sort of connection between the two, no

logical account for the derivation of meaning from a word

can be given. Bhartrhari has found in such a relation the

fundamental solution of why things are invariably signified

by their corresponding words.

Various are the ways in which different schools of

Indian thought have sought to explain this relation. Let us

first find out the real issues involved in such a standpoint.

Some hold that the relation between word and thing is

permanent or natural. They are the Mimamsakas and the

grammarians. Their argument is that this relation seems

to be eternal, as no author of it is mentioned in the scrip-

tures. The Naiyayikas and the Vaisesikas on the other hand,

look upon this relation as conventional (i.e., the outcome of

Sanketa), or as the creation of divine volition. Some again

(and Punyaraja is one among them) are of opinion that the

relation between sound and sense is just the same as exists

between the cause and the effect, manifestor (grahaka) and

manifest (grahya) and so on. Some have made no distinction

between speech and thought, i.e., take word and thing as

convertible with each other. A reciprocity of causal con-

nection, sambandha—samuddesa has also been detected

between word and meaning. A climax was, however, reached

when sound and sense were declared to be essentially the

same. The question how words come to be invested with

acquired meaning (not from the standpoint of the Dhvani-

vadins), will be discussed in Ch. II.

The grammarians have analysed at length this relation

between sabda and artha. The view of Vyadi, as alluded to

by Punyaraja under Vakya-padiya I. 26, is that there is no

author of the relation that exists between words and the

objects denoted by them. The grammarians seem to have

7 (OP 179)

gone a step further than the Mimamsakas by insisting also on the eternality of meanings. The Mahabhasya has started with the dictum that words, their meanings and the relation between them are all permanently fixed, i.e. eternal. The eternality of relation has been stated in clear terms by Patanjali—nityo hyarthovatam-arthairbhi-sambandha (Maha-bhasya. I. 1.1). As to how this kind of permanent relation comes under one’s cognitions, it is said that the object for which words are expressly used, constitutes in itself a sufficient proof to show that the association between words and their meanings cannot be anything but natural and permanent.

If there were no such relation, i.e. if sabda and artha were incapable of being brought together by a natural affinity, no one would have ever felt the necessity of using words for the sake of communicating his thoughts to others.

It follows that Bharata must have been keenly aware of the relation between sabda and artha. It is particularly so, because Patanjali seems to have deeply influenced Bharata’s outlook (See ch. VI). It is useful to remember that an exactly similar position is also held in the Abhidhamma system. In Pali, sabda means a sound or a word, and artha means a concept or matter, or in other words, the former is a sign that signifies the latter. Pannatti (Sk. Prajnapti) which means both name and notion, or term and concept is of several kinds. There is a two-fold derivation of the term, pannatti; “it is either that which makes known or presents the thing denoted before one’s mind (pannapatiti) or that which is made known (pannapiyatiti).

It is therefore, a term, which has combined in itself the double aspects of pramana and prameya of the Hindu philosophy. It is both the means of knowing and the object knowable. In the Abhidhamma, two classes of pannatti are found, namely sabda-pannatti, and attha-pannatti. The former is the same as nama-pannatti. Sabda-pannatti is significantly so called inasmuch as it renders the intended sense intelligible to others, and attha-pannatti is so called as it becomes cognisable to others by means of a sign or a word. It appears that the Buddhist philosophers like the Hindus, held that there is a correlation or interdependence of these two kinds of pannatti, between word and meaning.

The Tantras are equally emphatic on this indissoluble relation between sabda and artha. In the Tantras, Vak is

not only described as the creative potentiality of the

Supreme Being, but as one with, or inseparable from, Him.

Vak is again, called the first manifestation of cit-sakti, that

lies dormant in all beings. The production of sound is

explained by the Tantrikas as a kind of Movement (spandana)

in the Consciousness, which remains otherwise calm and

serene (asabda).

To understand the Tantrika view of sabda and artha,

it is necessary to analyse the doctrine of bindu. The

Prapancasara, Saradatilakas and other agamas have dealt

with this particular topic with considerable thoroughness.

It is said that the creative impulse of Parasiva, inseparably

united with Para Sakti, takes the form of a bindu—the

reservoir of energy in the terms of the Tantras (Sakti-tattva).

(Prapancasara. I. 41). Of the three primordial elements

(Siva, Sakti, and bindu), recognised by the Tantras, it is

bindu from which arises, as its first revelation, the subtle

form of sound, called nada. From this indistinct and

indeterminate, nada-bindu, which has its origin in the

internal part of the body, evolves the intellect with its

dual aspects of word and meaning (Prapanca-sara. I. 44).

Bindu divides itself into three aspects, namely gross,

subtle and extremely subtle forms, answering to the three

stages, such as bindu, nada and bija. When bindu splits up

by the will of God, a subtle and indistinct sound is pro-

duced therefrom. This is the first evolution of sound, the

primordial sound, Om, called sabda-Brahman by the

Agamikas. This has been variously termed ; sometimes as

pranava, and sometimes as parā vāk. The meditation on

sabda Brahman is held to be a distinct step towards a still

higher realisation. One who has a deeper insight into this

mystic form of vāk is ultimately blessed with a positive

knowledge of the Absolute.

It is difficult to arrive at a precise definition of bindu.

One may identify it with the vital element, with "the first seed

of creation," or simply with the jivanu (germ-atom) from a

biological point of view. In the language of the Tantras,

bindu is an extremely subtle entity from which the six pure

paths (adhva) follow, and to which they are ultimately

reduced. Bindu is the last point in the universal chain of

causation.

Bindu, under the influence of maya, is bifurcated into

30

mind and matter, or sabda and artha. The first product of

bindu is nada, which in turn, gets itself divided into the

denotative and the denoted, i.e., word and meaning. Vacya

and vacaka in their mutual conjunction constitute a vivid

parallelism to the eternal relation between para-siva and para-

sakti. The six paths that proceed from bindu have, on the

basis of word and its denotation, been divided under two

groups: (1) mantra (incantation), varna (letter), and pada

(syllable or inflected word) and (ii) kala (power), tattva

(principle or real entity), and bhuvana (world). The former

group represents the different varieties of sound, and the

latter those of meanings.

In considering the relation between sabda and artha, the

question that naturally rises in one's mind is how the sound

uttered by us for the purpose of denoting some object turns

out so powerful a symbol as to convey exactly the same sense

to others). The question may also be put in a different form :

why does a man understand nothing but a pot, whenever he

hears the sound ghata? The answer offered by the Tantras

in course of showing the significance of the mantras is cal-

culated to throw some light on the solution of the problem.

The efficiency of mantras (as are composed of words and

matrika-varnas) constitutes an important and cardinal teach-

ing of the Tantras.

Everything has a particular name or samjna, whereby

it is distinguished from the rest. There is a natural connec-

tion between a name and the object so named. A thing or a

person has an inseparable relationship with its or his name.

No other than the person, for instance, who has got that name,

Hari is likely to respond, whenever the same is uttered. This

will go to show the nature of kinship between the two. Naman

and namin (name and the person named) are closely related

with each other. The later school of Vaishnavism had laid

supreme stress on the importance of naman (or bija-mantra),

making the devata and his name altogether coincident or

identical. Some have gone so far as to eulogise naman as

of greater efficiency than the deity himself. The Tantras

have also subscribed to the same view by identifying a

mantra with its presiding deity (mantradhisthatr-devata). In

the Tantrik texts, no difference has been made between a

mantra or bija, and the devata that it represents in a mystical

way. The relation which a mantra bears to its deity is the

same as vacaka-vacya, i.e. a particular deity is always denoted

by a particular bija-mantra. The mantras are not lifeless, and

meaningless syllables ; but they are full of potentiality. Every

one of them, as the Tantras enjoin, is the living symbol of a

deity and an inexhaustible source of power.

Inseparable is the relation in which speech and thought

have mingled together. This undivided character of sabda

and artha comes to one's comprehension only in a stage of

higher spiritual cultivation, when all forms of dualism dis-

appear or merge into an undivided entity. Pure conscious-

ness, in the terms of theological interpretation, presents

itself to man in two different modes of internal and external

experience. This is why it has been said that sabda

and artha are but different aspects of one and the same

thing (Vakyapadiya. 2. 31). When sabda and artha are

reduced to their ultimate nature, the high walls of conven-

tion creating such differentiation break down to pieces.

Bhartrhari has, on the basis of this deep-rooted spiritual

conviction, postulated a peculiar doctrine of evolution, which

scught to explain the whole phenomenal universe as a trans-

formation or vivarta of sabda-brahman, or what is called

Logos in Christian theology.

All these will indicate that there is a subsisting relation

between the sign and the object so signified, in some shape

or other. The existence of this relation, whether natural or

conventional, has been clearly brought out by Indian teachers

and grammarians. Bhartrhari in Vakyapadiya I, has

emphatically asserted that there is a relation between a word

and its meaning. Helaraja by writing, Swabhavatah eva

niruho na tu purusena nivesita ityartha ,has again emphasized

this standpoint. The same position has been strengthened

further when he speaks of this relation as fixed by nature.

The existence of a connection is sufficiently borne out by the

very nature of a word and its meaning.

The subsisting relation between word and its meaning

is dominant through the first three stages of evolution of

sound. It is at the stage of Vaikhari, that there is for the

first time, a dissociation of sound and sense. Uptill this

stage, sound and sense are inextricably mixed up. But

beyond this stage, sound and sense are distinct, and separate.

It is to be noted that the diverse senses, attached to the word,

Rasa, must have been put on it after the Vaikhari stage.

32

When Rasa is defined as "swdya-madhura . . . . .", Rasa is obviously looked at as yet undivided into separate ideas in the Vaikhari stage. It thinks of one of the three stages, para, pasyanti and madhyama ,where sound and sense are still undistinguished.

People who cannot look beyond the Vaikhari stage, are led to believe that there is no co-ordination between sound and sense. But those others, who can look into madhyama, or pasyanti or para, should know that sound and sense are eternally wedded together; and that if the ancient writers had used the word rasa with reference to both alamkara and ayurveda, it showed unmistakably that the speculations in these two branches must have been of an allied nature, and that one must have been influenced by the other.

CHAPTER II

Sense-knowledge and Aesthetic Experience, in Indian Analysis. Role of Vibhavas in Bharata’s Rasa-Sutra

It has been very little noticed that Bharata’s Rasa-Sutra vibhava-anubhava-vyabhichari-samyogena rasanishpatti presupposes an awareness of the earlier speculations on the nature of sense-knowledge in Abhidhamma philosophy, as also in the earlier and later speculations of the Samkhya. The Abhidhamma philosophy in analysing consciousness, recognises in it a complex of various psychic factors, called Cetasika. The most simple ones are the Cakkh-Vinnana (eye-consciousness), Sota-Vinnana (ear-consciousness), Ghana-Vinnana (nose-consciousness), Jivha-Vinnana (tongue-consciousness), and Kaya-Vinnana (touch-consciousness). They are pure sensations, unalloyed with any reflection over the object. But if they are examined more closely, they are found to consist of as many as seven factors in them, namely, (1) Phassa (contact of the subject with the object), (2) Vedana (the feeling of the subject that it has been affected by the object), (3) Sanna (marking the object), (4) Cetana (volition, inclining towards the object), (5) Ekaggata (concentrating towards the object), (6) Jivitindriya (psychic life) and (7) Manasikara (attending to the object).

Phassa is the “contact” of the subject with the object, which may be either material or ideational. There can be no consciousness without this primary factor. This “phassa” corresponds to the apprehension of vibhava in Bharata’s Rasa-analysis, or the indriya-indriyartha-samyoga in the analysis of the Samkhya.

Vedana is the feeling of the subject that it has been affected either pleasantly, painfully or neutrally; and it is essentially found in all consciousness. This would correspond to anubhava in Rasa-analysis.

Sanna is “marking the appearance of the object” that makes it possible to recognise a thing. As it marks only the surface-appearance, without going into its intrinsic nature, it is very often deceptive, as in the case of an illusion. Cetana is the “motiveless inclination” of the subject towards the object when a Phassa has already taken place. In the

34

moral or immoral types of consciousness (kusala or akusala vipaka citta), this factor is called "karma", either of the mind, or the speech, or the action.

Ekaggata is concentrating upon an object; it varies in strength in different moments of consciousness. In Pancad-

varavajjna or in Cakhu-vinnana, it is very feeble, but in the Jhana, it is fully steady. It appears that the Abhidhamma analysis from Sanna to Ekaggata takes a different course,

leaning more towards knowledge (jnana) than towards pure aesthetic cognition (bodha or pratiti). But a closer analysis would reveal that jnana and bodha are two facets of the same reality.

The Abhidhamma in analysing the objects of consciousness*1 (Bk. I. Ch. III. Sec. 5. XIX) notes how consciousness is the relation that the subject has with the object, either of a material or ideational nature. It cannot be thought to have an independent existence of its own. "There are six kinds

of the 'object' of consciousness, namely—(1) visible, (2) audible, (3) odorous, (4) sapid, (5) tactual and (6) ideational. The Abhidhamma divides ideational objects again,

into six kinds. These six "objects" of consciousness arise through the six doors. "Visible form alone is the object of all the types of consciousness, arising through the eye-door.

It should necessarily be presentative. In the same manner, sound is the object of all the types of consciousness, arising through the ear-door; smell of all these arising through the nose-door; taste of all these arising through the tongue-door;

and touch of all those arising through the touch-door. All of them must necessarily be presentative." (Ibid. XXLa).

"Form is the only object of eye-consciousness. Similarly, sound, smell, taste and touch are respectively the only objects of ear-consciousness, nose-consciousness, tongue-consciousness and touch-consciousness" (Bk. I. Ch. III.

Sec. 5. XX11a). "The types of Pancadwaravajjana arise on all the five objects of senses, viz., form, sound, smell, taste and touch" (Ibid. XX 11 b).

The objects of consciousness are called "alambana", a term which Bharata also uses in describing objects of sense-experience. This is alambana vibhava. The Abhidhamma is not content with an analysis of the objects of aesthetic

1 Abhidhamma Philosophy—J. Kasyap (Nalanda. 1954).

35

experience. It also discusses the organs or indriyas, which are

six in number. These are (1) eye, (2) ear, (3) nose, (4) tongue,

(5) skin and (6) heart. The Abhidhamma goes on further,

and finds the presence of all the six organs in the Kama-world.

"Nose, tongue and skin, these three organs, do not exist in

the Rupa world. In the Arupa-world, there are no organs

at all" (Bk. I. Ch. III. Sec. 6. XXIV). The Abhidhamma thus

distinguishes between sensations of eye and ear, which belong

to Rupa-loka. In Arupa-loka cognition exists by itself,

independent of the six organs.

Some of the fundamental conceptions of the Abhidham-

mists together with the manner of argument advanced by them

to establish their validity closely follow those of the particular

school of Samkhya represented in the Yoga-Sutra and

specially in its Bhasya2. It should be noted that Bharata's

Rasa-speculations are deeply indebted to Patanjala tradition

(Ch. VI). It is needless here to enter into an examination

of the gunas of the Samkhya and the dharmmas of the Abhi-

dhamists, which constitute the basic conceptions of their

respective systems.3 It is of more immediate interest to note

here that the Patanjala analysis of sense-knowledge follows

the Abhidhamma position. The study of Panca-Dvaravajjana

is very close to the Patanjala analysis of indriya-indriyartha-

samyoga. The Abhidhamma writes, "Form is the only object

of eye-consciousness; similarly, sound, smell, taste and touch

are respectively the only objects of ear-consciousness, nose-

consciousness, tongue-consciousness and touch-consciousness"

(Bk. I. Ch. III. 5. xxii a). "The types of Panca-Dvaravaj-

jana and Sampaticchana consciousness arise on all the five

objects of senses, viz. form, sound, smell, taste and touch"

(Ibid. xxii.b.). Panca-Dvaravajjana and the two Sampatic-

chana, these three types of consciousness, are together called

Manodhatuttika or the "triple mind-element". They arise

on all the five objects of sense.*4

The seat of the five indriyas is according to Abhidhamma

analysis, the heart and not the brain. In Bk. I. Ch. III. Sec. 6.

xxv.b, the Abhidhamma writes, "Mano-dhatu (simple cogni-

tion) i.e. the two Sampaticchana and the Panca-Dvaravajjana

2 Central Conception of Buddhism, Ch. XXII—Prof. Stcherbatsky.

3 Dharmas of the Buddhists and the Gunas of the Samkhya—Ibid. I.H.Q.

Vol. X. pp. 737–60.

4 Abhidhamma Philosophy. Bk. I. Ch. III. Sec. 5.—J. Kasyapa (Nalanda. 1954)

8 (OP 179)

36

consciousness, arise depending on the heart-organ”. Caraka,

in exact agreement with the Abhidhamma position, recognises

the hrdaya as the seat of all forms of consciousness . Caraka

writes,

पडगसर्ग विग्यानभिन्द्रियान्यर्थपंचकम् ।

आत्मा च षड्गुणुचेतन्वितस्तत्र हृदि संस्थितम् ॥

तस्योपघातानुमुच्चयात्तु मेदान्मनरंभुच्चरि ।

यद्धि ततूस्पर्शविज्ञानं धारि तत्त्व तत्र स्थितम् ॥

तत् परस्यौजसः स्थानं तत्र चैतन्यसंग्रहः ।

हृदयं महदर्थश्च तस्मादुक्त चिकित्सिते ॥

(Sutra-Sthanam 30.2)

The body consisting of the six limbs, (2) knowledge, (3-7)

the five senses and the five objects of the senses, (8) the

soul as invested with attributes, (9) the mind, and (10) the

thoughts are all seated in the hrdaya. Caraka in Siddhi-

sthanam (9.3) again writes,

तत्र हृदि दरधमन्यः प्राणोदानौ मनः ।

बुद्धीश्चेतना महाभूतानि चनुस्याममरा इव प्रतिष्ठितानि । शिरसीन्द्रियाणि

इन्द्रियप्रानवहानि च श्रोतंषि सूर्यामिवगतस्थत्वः संश्रितानि । (6)

In the hrdaya are seated the (1) ten dhamanis and (2) prana,

(3) udana vayus, (4) mind, (5) intelligence, and (6-10) the

five mahabhootas. Just as the rays of the sun are being

supported by the sun, similarly the sense of perception

and channels of the senses and life are also being supported

by the heart.” Cakrapani, commenting on the five maha-

bhootas mentioned in this passage, says that the bhootas

mean the five objects or indrivartha of the five senses of

perception. These are (1) kshiti, i.e. carrier of smell, and

(2) apabhoota, i.e. carrier of taste, (3) teja bhoota ; i.e.

carrier of form, (4) vayu bhoota, i.e. carrier of touch and

(5) akasa bhoota, i.e. carrier of sound. Caraka by singling

out prana and udana as the two vayus seated in the hrdaya,

emphasizes the sensory functions of the heart. These breaths

are briefly described in the Yoga-bhasya ; and to a greater

length in the Tattva-Vaisaradi (Yoga-sutra III. 39). Of these,

prana is located within the heart. But it extends upto the

mouth and the nose through which the air is drawn and

then expelled from the lungs.

Caraka refers to all five indriyas or senses as the seat of Prana Vayu.

स्थानं प्राणस्य इन्द्रियैः:-कर्णजिह्वाक्षिनासिका: |

ष्टीन-कषव्यूगार-श्वासहारादि कर्म च ॥ (7)

(Cikitsa-sthanam. 28.4)

Vagbhata in Astanga-hrdaya writes,

उरः कण्ठचरो वुद्धि हृदयोन्द्रिय-चित्तधृक् ।

ष्टीन-कषव्यूगार-निःश्वासान्न प्रवेशकृत् ॥ (8)

(Sutra-sthanam. 12)

Caraka speaks of touch, hearing, taste, sight and smell as all objects of ahara; these are all functions of the heart. In Susruta also, the hrdaya is said to be the primary seat of consciousness in animated beings. Sleep overcomes a man whenever the hrdaya is enveloped in the illusive effects of tamas”. (Sarira-sthanam. 4.35). Susruta writes once again, “The hrdaya is the seat of intellect and mind” (Sarira-sthanam. 3.18). Caraka discusses how Vayu, which is seated in the heart, when afflicted, aggravates the doses. (Nidana-sthanam 7.3). “Gaining control of the hrdaya, it then obstructs the channels through which the mind operates, thus begetting insanity”. It is needless to emphasize the part played by Vayu in all kinds of sense-knowledge. Caraka writes,

वायुरारुढो वायव्यर्थान् धारयिष्णाम् ।

वायुविश्वमिदं सर्वं प्राणवायुयुक् चिकित्सित॥ (9)

(Cikitsa-sthanam 28.2)

The Prasna-Upanishad writes of prana-vayu : अहमेवैतत्

पंचधात्मानं विमसयैतद्वाणमवस्थभ्य विधारयामि ; the prana divides itself into five ; and thus maintains the body. Again, it is said प्राणश्र विधारयितव्यंच or the prana in its activities, sustains life. The Upanishads emphasize that by prana is meant the power by which ahara or sensuous impressions are taken in, and turned into flesh and blood. The Mahabharata in Aswa-medha. 17, writes, स्रोतोमियें विजानाति

इन्द्रियार्थान् शरीरमृत् । तैरैव च विजानाति प्राणान् आहारसम्भवान् ।

38

The prana which always gathers ahara, is at the root of all knowledge. In the Santi-parvan. 185, it is said,

वहृत्यन्नरसन्नाम्यो दशप्राणप्रचोदिता: ।

The prana and other Vayus impel the nadis to carry the rasa of anna or ahara. In Aswamedha. 19, the different activities of the prana are clearly indicated.

मुक्तामिदं कोष्ठे कथमन्नं विपच्यते ।

अर्थ रसत्वं प्रापति शोणितत्वं च पुनः ।।

तथा मां स च मेदक्ष सायुस्थीनि च पेशति ।

कथमेतानि सर्वाणि शरीराणि शारीरिणाम् ।।

तथा हि वर्धतां वर्धमानस्य वर्धते च कथम् वलम् ।

निरोजसां निर्गमनमनागंच पृथक् पृथक् ।।

कुतो वायं निःष्ठसति उच्चुसित्यापि वा पुनः ।। (10)

Food or anna when taken in, is turned into rasa, and from rasa is developed first of all, blood. Anna sustains flesh (mamsa), bones (asthi), fat (meda) and nerves (snayu). The strengthening of body, and maintenance of the growth of a growing body, the separation of inert matter and its throwing away, all these are the results of the activities of prana. This prana which gathers all sense-impressions, is seated in the hrdaya, so that the hrdaya itself is activated in search of new aharas. This again is exactly the position held in Caraka's Sutra-sthanam. 28. 2. Caraka writes :

पुष्यन्ति त्वाहार रसाद्रसधराममेदोऽस्थिमज्जशुक्रोजांसि

पञ्चेन्द्रियद्रव्याणि धातुप्रसादसञ्जकानि । (11) All these are the results of ahara, gathered by hrdaya.

Vayu acts as the mediator between indriya and indriyartha. In any kind of sense-knowledge, the indriya and the indriyartha must come together. Caraka says that in the absence of Vedana (arising out of sense-knowledge), the soul attains its purest self.

सर्वविदू सर्वसच्यासो सर्वयोगनिःश्रुतः ।

एकः प्रशान्तो भूतात्मा कैवल्ये रुपलभ्यते ।। (12)

(Sarira-sthanam 1.2)

But this detached, perfectly pure soul enters human body, when it comes in contact with manas. Caraka writes,

39

खादयश्चेतनाधातुणष्टास्तु पुरुष:स्मृत: ।

चेतनाधातुरप्येक: स्मृत: पुरुषसंज्ञक: ॥

पुनश्व धातुभेदेन चतुर्विशतिक: स्मृत: ।

मनोदशेन्द्रियार्थार्थ: प्रकृतिश्राष्टधातुकी ॥ (13)

(Sarira-sthanam 1.4)

This manas by impregnating the cetana-dhatu, activates the soul. This manas is of the nature of Sakti. Caraka and Bharata are agreed on the important role of manas in Rasa enjoyment.*5 Caraka is perfectly clear how knowledge on the part of the detached cetana-dhatu is made possible by the intervention of manas. Caraka goes on:

या यदिन्द्रियमाश्रित्य जन्तोरुन्द्रिय प्रवर्तते ।

याति सा तेन निर्देशं मनसा च मनोभवा ॥

भेदात् कायेन्द्रियार्थानां वहत्यं व वुद्धयते: स्मृत: ।

आत्मेन्द्रियमनोर्थानामेकैका सन्निकर्षजा: ॥

... ...

बुद्धीन्द्रियमनोर्थानां विद्यात् योगघरं परम् ।

चतुर्विशतिक: ह्रोष राशी: पुरुषसंज्ञक: ॥ (14)

(Sarira-sthanam. 1.10)

This rasi-purusa is one, who enjoys sights and sounds, and takes in all kinds of sense-impressions. In Sarira-sthanam. 1. 14. Caraka describes the character of this rasi purusa, who has likes and dislikes, strong preferences and equally strong avoidances. He is, as Caraka says,

राशिसज्ञास्तु मोहेच्छाद्वेषकर्मण: ।

Caraka emphasizes that the soul, which is a-cetana, is activated by manas.

अचेतनं क्रियावद्रे मनश्येतयिता पर: ।

युक्रुस्य मनसा तस्य निदर्शन्ते विभो: क्रिया: ॥ (15)

(Sarira-sthanam 1.20)

The tenets and doctrines of Samkhya referred to in Caraka as also in the Yoga-Bhasya, do not always correspond

5 For a detailed analysis of the part played by manas or visuddha-sattva in Rasa enjoycent, see Chs. IV and V.

to those of Iswarakrishna. From a careful study of these

texts, it is found that the Yoga-bhasya follows the Varsaganya

school of Samkhya, and specially that of Vindhyavasin. This

can be noticed from the fact that the author of the Bhasya in

support of his statements, occasionally quotes fragments from

the works of Varsaganya and his followers.

It is of great interest to note Bharata’s analysis of

indriya-indriyartha in support of the contention that Bharata

is following the Patanjala tradition of the Samkhya. Bharata

writes,

शब्दं स्पर्शं च रूपं च रसं गन्धं तथैव च।

इन्द्रियाणीन्द्रियार्थींश्र भावैरभिनियेद्‌बुधः॥ (81)

पञ्चानामिन्द्रियार्थानां भावा ह्रोतेऽनुभाविनः ।

श्रोतत्वक्‍त्रिजिह्वानां प्राणस्य च तथैव हि ॥(85)

इन्द्रियार्थाः समनसो भवन्ति ज्ञानानुभाविनः ।

न वेधि धामनः किंचिद्दिष्यं पञ्चधागतम् ॥ (87)

इष्टे शब्दे तथा रूपे स्पर्शे गन्धे तथा रसे।

इन्द्रियैरमनसा प्राप्तैः सीमुख्यं प्रदर्शयेत् ॥ (90) (16)

(G.O.S. Vol. III)

All forms of sense-knowledge are included: and Bharata holds

that indriya and indriyartha must be brought together for any

kind of cognition. Bharata holds further that sense-percep-

tion, which lies at the root of all Rasa-enjoyment, in only

possible for one who is “Samanassa”, a term, he uses once

again in Natya-Sastra, Ch. VI in describing Rasa-realisation

(See Ch. IV). Bharata uses a synonym of Samanassa in

sloka 90, quoted above; it is सौमुख्य। All forms of sense-know-

ledge are ahara (See Ch. II. Part II); and such ahara is for

Samanassa. If one is not Samanassa or amana (sloka. 87),

meaning not favourably disposed to knowledge brought in

by the senses, then there cannot be any Rasa-realisation.

The Abhinava-Bharati explains समनस in a similar way.

Abhinava writes (III. p. 183-4) मनस्संयोगो य आत्मन् इच्छाद्‌रेष-

41

मार्गसूलक्षणो भावः समनस इत्युक्तः । कापिलदृशि तु विन्ध्यवासिनो मानस एव

ईश्वरकृष्णादिमते मनःशब्देनात्र बुद्धिः । (17)

Abhinava recognises*6 that Bharata’s concept of manas is

closer to Vindhyavasin. This admission at once affiliate

Bharata’s Rasa-speculations to Patanjala tradition, and

Caraka; for it has already been noticed that philosophically

speaking, Patanjala and Vindhyavasin belong to the same

tradition of the Samkhya.

Carak’s analysis of how a-cetana or nirvikara-atma is

activated by the intervention of manas, has deeply influenced

Bharata’s Rasa-speculations, as also the speculations of

Abhinavagupta. The shining-forth or sphurana of the soul

would have been unvaried, and hence imperceptible, if there

had not been the play of Sakti (vide Ch. I). Sakti helps the

soul to shine forth as a many-splendoured thing. The manas

is this cit-sakti, which makes possible the enjoyment of Rasa.

The Samkhya recognises two different functions of indriyas.

These are (1) perception, and (2) action. The first group

constitutes what are called Jnanendriya. Eye, ear, nose,

tongue and skin are the five organs of perception, and form,

sound, smell, taste and touch are their objects respectively.

All objects are perceived by organs of perception. Tongue,

hand, leg, anus and penis are the five organs of action, and

their objects are speech, reception, motion, excretion and

pleasure respectively. By these two sets of indriyas,

jnanendriya and karmendriya, all actions are performed (vide

Introduction. IV).

Besides these ten indriyas, there exists one more indriya,

which is called the mind. The mind is not only the eleventh

indriya ; it is the regulator and the principal of the other

indriyas. Other indriyas, particularly organs of perception,

are inactive without the mind. Eye is an organ of perception;

its function is vision and its object is form. If the form of

any external object appears before the sight (what the

Abhidhamma calls “phassa”), it is received by the eyes, the

organ of perception. But if that object is not received by

the mind, no knowledge of that object is possible; in other

words, the object is not visible. This shows that objects are

not really seen with eyes; these are seen with the mind. Mind

6 For a clear exposition of Abhinavagupta’s concept of manas or sakti,

see Ch. V.

42

is the real organ of sense. The eye only receives the

external form. The ear only receives the sound; the nose only

the smell, the tongue the taste, and the skin only

the touch of an object. But the knowledge of form,

sound, smell, taste and touch is only imparted through

the mediation of mind. The mind is thus really an organ

of perception. Again, the five organs of action

(Karmendriya) also are inactive without the mind. The

inspiration of their activity comes from the mind. Thus mind

is simultaneously the organ of perception and of action.

Susruta says ; “Mind is both the organ of perception and of

action” उभयात्मकक् मनः (Sarira-sthanam 1.4).

None of the organs of perception and action can per-

form its function without depending upon the mind. An organ

to which the mind is attached, becomes active. Caraka says:

मनःपुरःसरणीन्द्राण्यर्थग्रहणसमर्थानि भवन्ति (Sutra-sthanam. 8.4). “The

senses become capable of seizing their respective

objects only when they are led by the mind”. It appears

from an analysis of the ancient medical literature that hrdaya

is the chief instrument in all kinds of sense-impressions. But

hrdaya being only an organ, must be activated by something,

which is of the nature of energy. This energy is supplied by

manas, which is seated in the hrdaya. Hrdaya is pressed into

activity by the likes and dislikes of the manas.

There are innumerable passages in Caraka, Susruta and

Bhela, where the seat of mind has been identified with hrdaya.

This is very appropriate, because while mind being उभयात्मक

is karta, the hrdaya is its karana; and the two always go

together. Susruta in Sarira-sthanam, 3.18 writes हृदयं …

वृद्धे मनसक् स्थानत्वात् —the hrdaya is the seat of intellect and

mind. In Sutra-sthanam, 30.2. Caraka writes,

आत्मा च सगुणश्चेतिचिन्तय हृदयस्थितमक्

The soul as invested with attributes, the mind and thoughts

are established in the hrdaya. Bhela in Cikitsa-sthanam.

ch. 8, p. 149, writes

कारणं सर्वबुद्धीनांक् चित्तक् हृदयस्थितमक् ।

क्रियानां चैतनानांक् चित्तक् सर्वस्यकारणमक् ॥ (18)

“Mind, the reason of all sorts of intellect, is situated in

43

the hrdaya. Mind is only the cause of all actions". Bhela writes once again,

शिरस्ताल्यन्तर्गंत सर्वेन्द्रिय परं मनः । (19)

मनस्ताल्यन्तराश्रितम् । हृदि सन्तिष्ठते चित्त बुद्धिः सर्वेन्द्रिय (Ch. 5 p. 294)

"Mind is situated between the skull and the palate. Mind, intellect and all senses exist in the hrdaya". Bhela uses the word citta in both citations as synonymous with manas. The Kasyapa-samhita similarly writes,

हृदयात् सम्प्रवर्त्तते मनःपूर्वाणि देहिनाम् । इन्द्रियाणीन्द्रियार्थौदा … हितम् ॥ (21) (Phakha Ch. 6)

"Mind along with the organs of senses, originates from the hrdaya of living beings".

The foregoing analysis of the seat of manas must have made it clear what a great part is played by both manas and hrdaya in all aesthetic experience. Though the two function jointly, it appears that the earlier writers, like Bharata and the early systems of philosophy, like the Abhidhamma, prefer manas, and the later Alamkarikas would have hrdaya substituted for manas. Bharata repeatedly says that Rasa-realisation is always of one who is sumannasa, and the Abhidhamma philosophy sharply distinguishes sumannassa from dumanassa. But later Alamkarikas turn away from manas, and emphasize the role of hrdaya. But this is a distinction without a difference. All later Alamkarikas hold that Rasa-realisation is of the Sahrdaya. Abhinavagupta writes of Rasa-realisation as hrdaya-sambada (Abhinava-Bharati, vol. I. p. 292.); Mammata speaks of "Sakala-sahrdaya-samvada-bhaja", showing thereby the great importance of the concept of hrdaya as the seat of sensory organs in aesthetic analyses.

II

The contact of indriya with indriyartha, comprehending all kinds of sense-knowledge, is ahara. In Sec. 1, the organs

9 (OP 179)

and their instruments used in all such aharas, have been discussed. Caraka in Sutra-sthanam. 28. 5, includes under

ahara, sabda, sparsa, rupa, rasa and gandha. Caraka takes over the speculations of Samkhya, which again are very close

to panca-dvara-vinnana of Abhidhamma philosophy. He says further that health is the result of proper ahara, just as disease

arises out of improper and unsuitable ahara. Caraka writes,

……कवलं शरीरोपचयप्रवृत्त-

विविधर्माशिनं पोतं लीढं खादितं जन्नोर्हितम्।

वर्णसुखायुषा योजयति धातुतुर्जयति (22)

Wholesome food thus contributes to health. Again the body or deha being the result of ahara, the careful man should

select proper diet.

न रागान्नापि विज्ञानादाहारानुपयोजयेत् ।

परीक्ष्य हितमश्रीयादहे द्राहारसम्भवः॥ (23)

(Caraka Sutras 28.22)

Caraka lays very great emphasis on ahara. He writes that diseases are all the outcome of unsuitable diet. Caraka

writes:

आहारप्रभवं वस्तु रोगाइश्चाहारसम्भवः ।

हिताहितविशेषाच्च विशेष सुखदुःखयोः ॥ (24)

(Sutra 28.25)

Everything is rooted in ahara; and diseases are the result of ahara. These, in their turn, give rise to pleasure and pain.

Caraka says further, as he analyses the causes of diseases:

एवमिदं शरीरमचितलीढपीतखादितप्रभवमशितपीत-लीढ-प्रभावश्च शरीर-

स्मिन् बध्यादयो भवन्ति । (Sutra. 28.3).25 He holds that contact with

unsuitable sabda, sparsa, rupa, rasa and gandha along with changes of seasons and parinam, may be the cause of diseases

(Sutra. 28.5). In Sutra-sthanam, 28.3. Caraka says that Rasa is rooted in ahara. आहारमूलाम्यां रसः ।

It appears from the foregoing analyses that disease and health are both dependent on ahara. Caraka writes, if for any

reason there is an increase or decay of Rasa in the body, the remedy is to diminish or augment the Rasa by appropriate

ahara; and thus to reach a balance between all these different Rasas. The principle of achieving a balance through the

opposites applies equally to the kitta part of the body (See Ch. X).

निमित्ततस्तु क्षोणामिबृद्धानां प्रसादास्यानां वृद्धिक्षयास्यामाहारमूलम्यां रस

साम्यमुत्पादयत्यारोग्याय किंच मलानामेव । (26)

(Sutra. 28.3). It will be seen how achievement of balance (See Ch. X) through the union of opposites (See Ch. IX), is at the root of Rasa-realisation. It is important to note here that ahara helps in the achievement of this balance between different sarira and manasa Rasas.

The Abhidhamma philosophy which is close to Samkhya speculations also recognises the object-subject relation, or Arammana-paccaya. This object-subject relation in orthodox Samkhya, becomes the concept of ahara. Arammana in the Abhidhamma philosophy means the “object” of cognition. Arammana-paccaya is therefore a kind of relation, in which the paccaya-Dhamma is an “object” of the Paccayupanna, which must necessarily be a type of consciousness or a psychic factor. All the types of consciousness, all the psychic factors, all kinds of material qualities, and all the concepts may come as the Paccaya-Dhamma in this relation. In other words, all these may be the objects of cognition.

There is, in fact, not a single thing which does not become an Arammana of consciousness and the psychic factors. Thus it may be of six kinds, namely, visible Arammana, audible Arammana, odorous Arammana, sapid Arammana, tangible Arammana, and cognisable Arammana. These are the six kinds of the “objects” of consciousness (Abhidhamma Philosophy vol. 1, Bk. I, ch. III. 5, XIX). All these are alambana. Bharata’s discussion of alambana vibhava takes note of the first two objects of cognition; for the objects of kavya and rupaka are sravya and drsya. Bharata’s exclusion of odorous Arammana, sapid Arammana and tangible Arammana is explained by the fact that these organs do not exist in the Rupa world. These belong to the world of Kama (Abhidhamma Philosophy, vol. I. Bk. I. Ch. III. 6 XXIV).

In Bharata’s Rasa-analysis, attention should then be confined to visible Arammana, and audible Arammana. These

7 It might be of interest to note that the word “aesthetics” comes from a Greek root, ε σ θ ι ω meaning “to eat”. Ruskin takes the word aesthetics to mean simple sensuous impressions, without any super-imposition of thought.

46

two belong to the world of Rupa. But Rupa (matter) means

the whole aggregate of material qualities, while Nama (sensations) includes the four psychic aggregates (Vedana, Sanna,

Samkhara, and Vinnana), and Nibbana. A man's good and

bad activities (Sankhara) of one life determine the type of his

birth, his mental disposition, and all his resultant conscious-

ness (vipaka) in the next (i.e. his vinnana). This gives rise

to the mental and the physical states (Nama-Rupa) in his new

life, according to its own nature. Depending on these, he gets

the six Ayatana, namely eye, ear, nose, tongue, body and mind

(Salayatana). Depending on the six Ayatana, he gets a contact

(Phassa) with the object of cognition. Contact means feeling

(Vedana). Feeling gives rise to craving (tanha), and that to

grasping (upadana), which keeps on the process of life

(bhava).

Bhava thus comes a long way after Phassa, or ahara.

Without phassa, there cannot be any vedana ; then no Tanha,

then no upadana; then no Bhava, then no Jati, then no Jara-

Marana-Soka-Parideva-Dukkha-Domanassa-payasa. This is

Nibbana, the cessation of all evils.

Phassa with visible Arammana and audible Arammana

(Vibhava) gives rise, according to Abhidhamma analysis, to

Vedana (feeling). This vedana in its turn, gives rise to

Tanha (craving) and Upadana (grasping). This sets into

motion Bhava, which is characterised by tanha and upadana.

Tanha is characterised by Rajas, as upadana is by Tamas.

So Bhava or the struggle and process of life, is also

characterised by these two qualities.

The Abhidhamma analysis of bhava or the rise of the

processes of life is very close to the Patanjala analysis of

it. Caraka in Sutra-sthanam. 25. 13, writes,

येषामेवहि भावानां सम्पत्त् संजनयेत्यनरम् ।

तेषामेव व्यापदूग्र्याधीन् विविचान् समुदीरयेत् ॥ (27)

Just as the unbalance of certain bhavas (atman, manas,

Rasa, Saddhatu, parents, Karma, Swabhava, Prajapati and

Kala) gives rise to man, so also the unbalance of these

bhavas, gives rise to diseases. At the question of what

contributes to the development of purusa and of diseases,

Atreya replied proper diet sustains the development of the

purusa, just as improper food aggravates disease. (Sutra.

25. 14). Atreya in discussing the question says that proper food restores the bodily balance.

यदाहारजातमग्रिवेश समासचैव शरीरधातून् प्रकृतौस्यापयति, विषमांश्च समीकरोत्येतद् हितं विद्धि । (28

(Sutra. 25. 16).

This applies equally to the restoration of the balance of Samana dhatu, as also to the balance of Visama dhatu.

Diseases arising out of असात्म्येन्द्रियार्थ-संयोग, are rooted in ahara ; Caraka says, रोगाश्चाहार सम्भवा: (29) (Sutra. 28. 15).

So also bodies are dependent on, and springing out of ahara— देहो ह्याहार सम्भवः । (30) (Sutra. 28. 12).

It appears that disease and body in Caraka belong to the same category as "bhava" in Yoga-sutra.

The Yoga-sutra writes, भवप्रत्ययो विदेहप्रकृतिलयानाम् ।

(I. 19). The word "bhava" has been variously explained.

Vacaspati Misra explains "bhava" as avidya or ignorance.

Bhojaraja explains it as Samsara or creation.

The ancient literature of the Buddhists writes, "bhava-paccaya jati", or the determining cause of life is this relation with bhava.

So the cause of birth, rooted in ignorance, is "bhava".

This is very similar to the Abhidhamma concept of bhava as giving rise to the processes of life.

Bharata's concept of "bhava" seems to have been deeply influenced by Abhidhamma speculations, as also by Patanjala analysis.

Bharata explains "bhava" as "bhava-yanti bhāvam bhāvayanti bhāvं उच्यते ।

(VII. 2 Banaras ed.). Anything which comes into being is "bhava".

This is also the connotation of "bhava" in Abhidhamma system.

Bharata recognises several types of "bhava" in order of their appearance.

The nature of bhava, which is tinged with Rajas and Tamas, and its purification leading to the emergence of Rasa, are to be discussed in fuller detail in Chs. X and XI.

It is to be clearly recognised that bhava arises out of ahara, or contact with outside world.

This concept of ahara along with the analysis of purification, form the common basis of Abhidhamma system, Patanjala philosophy, and Bharata.

The common basis of the speculations of Ayurveda and Bharata may be further worked out.

It should be noticed that this basis is the Samkhya system, and the concept of

48

three gunas. There is pralaya when the gunas are balanced ;

creation is the result of the gunas in an unbalanced

state. All things are divided in Samkhya analysis into

three categories, Sattvic, Rajasic and Tamasic. Sarira

(body), indriyas (senses), visaya (objects) are similarly

divided into these categories, on account of this difference

in constituents, Sattva, Rajas and Tamas. The predomi-

nantly Sattvic purusa prefers Sattvic objects and rejects

Rajasa and Tamasa objects. Similarly, the predominantly

Rajasa purusa prefers Rajasa objects, and rejects Sattvic

and Tamasa things. So it is the case with the preferences

and avoidances of a predominantly Tamasa man. The predo-

minantly Sattvic objects are thus naturally dear to the

Sattvic purusa ; so Rajasa and Tamasa objects are naturally

dear to Rajasic and Tamasic purusas. The Bhagavad-Gita

in Ch. 18 discusses this question. The Gita also looks at

ahara as threefold, or Sattvic, Rajasic and Tamasic. Ahara

means here aharana or gathering. Whatever the indriyas

gather is known as ahara. The gathering of visual impres-

sion by the eye, of the audible impression by the ear, or of

the taste impression by tongue, all these are different forms

of ahara. The predominantly Sattvic purusa would thus

prefer Sattvic ahara. This preference is because of the

peculiar constitution of the citta of a particular purusa.

Citta-sattva is naturally of a Sattvic nature, though at the

same time, it is charged with Rajas and Tamas. So the

preference of Rajas ahara by a Rajasa purusa, and the pre-

ference of Tamas ahara by a Tamasa purusa, are explained.

All ahara nourishes citta-sattva. But ahara not merely

nourishes citta-sattva ; it nourishes the body, and the

indriyas as well. The body and the indriyas are satisfied

with all such aharas ; and with the satisfaction of the body,

the soul is also set at rest. The importance of the mainte-

nance of health occupy a very large place in all religious

practices. The medical literature of the Hindus does not

look at the maintenance of health as an end in itself. Caraka

in Sutrasthanam. Ch. 11, discusses the three coveted ends

of life. These are (1) Pranai-sana, (2) Dhanai-sana, and

(3) Paralokai-sana. These three are interdependent. While

the subect-matter of medicine is the maintenance of life or

Prana, the analysis of bhavs and rasas properly speaking,

comes under the third. The concepts of bhava (See Chs. II

and XI), vasana and sthayi-bhava (See Chs. VI and XI) and

of rasa (See Ch. IX) would be unintelligible to those, who

do not believe in Paralokai-sana. In discussing pranai-

sana, Caraka has to discuss rtu-charyya and dina-charyya

(Sutra-sthanam. Chs. VI, VII). Susruta devotes one chapter

(Sutra-sthanam. Ch. VII) to the discussion of rtu-charyya.

Rtu-charyya and dina-charyya by maintaining the health of

the body, will help regain mental balance. The chapters

on Sadacara (Amrita-Karana-Visranti Ch. 18), and Rtu-

charyya (Ibid. Ch. 19) in the Ananda-Kandam (Tanjore

Saraswati Mahal Series) should be consulted.*8 It explains

how sweet, acid and other physiological Rasas by nourish-

ing the body and senses, contribute to the development of

the citta-sattva, as sringara and karuna and other mental

Rasas by nourishing the citta-sattva, also maintain the

balanced health of the body. This is quite appropriate, for

the early Samkhya and the Buddhist analyses equally recog-

nise how body and mind are dependent on each other. This

is evident from Caraka, as also from the Abhidhamma

analysis. Caraka in Sarira-sthanam. 4. 16, writes, Sattvamca

Sariramanu-bidheeyate, Sariramca Sattvam. The Abhi-

dhamma philosophy recognises the same position in its

concept of nama-rupa.

Bharata's Rasa-sutra, vibhava-anubhava-vyabhichari-

samyogena Rasa-nishpatti would assume the following form,

when looked at from the standpoint of Samkhya analysis.

Vyabhicharibhava (physical manifestation)

Indriyartha Indriya Manas Buddhi Atman.

Vibhava Anubhava (mental manifestation)

It should be noted that this pattern applies equally to Sarira

Rasa as also to Manasa rasa. The indriyartha in the case

of poetry and drama, assumes diverse forms of sight and

sound. The indriyartha in the case of cooking (an analogy

of which Bharata is very fond) is one of the six Rasas. Both

are forms of ahara. The Indriya obviously differs in the

two cases ; in the first case, these are eye and ear. In the

8 The importance of body in Yoga, Tantra and in the speculation of the Rasa-

siddhas cannot be exaggerated. The body occupies an equally important

place in many schools of Buddhism, like the Vajra-yana.

50

second, it is the tongue. Caraka says that indriyas without

the manas cannot perceive anything. मनःपुरःसराणीन्द्रियार्थग्रहण

समर्थानि भवन्ति । (Sutra. 8. 4.)32 It has already been noticed

that this manas receives all sense-impressions. Bharata’s

recognition that the appreciator or spectator of poetry and

drama should be "Samanassa" points to the same conclusion.

The affiliation of Bharata’s Rasa-speculations to the

Samkhya scheme is so close that all different stages of his

Rasa-analysis, seem to have been deeply influenced by it.

The different stages of Bharata’s Rasa-analysis are vibhava,

anubhava, vyabhicharibhava and sattvikabhava. Each of

these stages deserves careful and close examination. While

indriyartha in the form of vibhava is ahara, the manifesta-

tion of those vibhavas in the physical body, takes the form

of vyabhicharibhava. But vyabhicharibhava is only the out-

ward expression of what is already present in the mind. This

last has been carefully analysed in Bharata under anubhava.

The gulf between indriyartha and indriya is bridged by

vayu. Sattvikabhava which is posterior to vibhava and

vay

anterior to vyabhicharibhava, seems to be very largely

dominated by vayu. The implication of this dominance of

vayu in Sattvikabhava is to be discussed in fuller detail in Ch. VII.

Bharata’s discussion of vibhava as a form of ahara,

seems also to follow the analysis of Sat-siddhi in Samkhya

philosophy. Barring a few instances in the Yukti-dipika, the

concept of sat-siddhi does not occur elsewhere in any other

existing treatise of Samkhya. It refers to the six kinds of

spiritual power, and these are (1) power of will (samkalpa-

siddhi), (2) power of vision (dristi-siddhi), (3) power of speech

(vak-siddhi), (4) power of touch by hand (hasta-siddhi),

(5) power of clasping (aslesa-siddhi), and (6) power of mutual

friction (dwanda-siddhi). At the beginning of creation,

when Sattva was abundant, an embodied self of that period

used to have the spiritual power of will (samkalpa-siddhi),

by the application of which he could produce an offspring.

The progeny or bhava at that time was born by a mere fiat

of will without having recourse to any sexual union. Numer-

ous instances of this type of creation are recorded in the

Vedas, Puranas and other scriptural texts. With the decay

of spiritual power, the creation of embodied beings was

51

determined by grosser forms of union. Thus in the next

stage, an offspring was produced by wistful amorous glances

of the parents. This still survives, says the author of the

Yukti-dipika, in the biological order. For instance, the

female tortoise conceives by casting a glance at the male

partner without recourse to any gross sexual union. This

has been called in the Yukti-dipika, dristi-siddhi. The Yukti-

dipika writes (p. 143-4) : यत्तु (क) च्छपिका निरीक्षतेनारण्ड धारणं

करोति ; प्रियं स्तल्पवि चक्षुषा निरीक्ष्य कृतार्थमात्मानं मन्यते ।

In the third place, with the loss of this power, one issue was

born by mere utterance of an expression like “let us have a

child”. This also survives in the lower biological order, as

the female conch conceives an issue by uttering a shrill

sound. The Samkara Bhasya, B.S. II. i. 25 writes, “the

female crane conceives from hearing the roaring of

thunder” : वलाका च स्तनितरवश्रवणाद् गर्भं धत्तते ।

Even in the higher order of biological creation, we see that

a glance at the beloved and consequent conversation on an

object of love cause delight. The Yukti-dipika writes

(p. 144) : तस्यामपि क्षीणायां वाक्सिद्धिर्द्वभूव । अभिमाष्य प्राणिनो यदिच्छन्ति

तदापदयन्ति । तदव्याप्यनुवर्त्तते, यच्च्छंक्षय बिस्तेनापत्यं विभजते । प्रियं

स्वल्पपि सम्माष्य महतों प्रीतिमतुभवति । (33)

It should be noted that the author of the Yukti-dipika notes

both forms of ahara, which form the basis of Bharata’s Rasa-

speculations. “Anda-dharana” or “apatya” are forms of

bhava, as has already been noticed in Buddhist “bhava-

paccya jati”. This bhava is the result of ahara, gathered

through the eye and the ear. The passage in the Yukti-

dipika describing the different forms of ahara, is close to

Caraka’s analysis of ahara. Bharata’s concept of bhava as

arising out of vibhava-vibhabena ahrita (Ch. 7. Sl. 1.

Banaras ed.) is to be read against the background of

Samkhya analysis of sense knowledge.

In thus tracing the evolution of both sarira and manas

Rasas to ahara, the writers on Alamkara and Ayurveda were

only following the fundamental tenet of Samkhya system,

that all Rasas are rooted in ahara. Caraka writes, ahara-

mulabhyam Rasa ; the Yoga-Sutra is careful in prescribing

appropriate diet at the time of Yogic practice. The Yoga

system recognises three different types of ahara for the

10 (OP 179)

52

Yogin. These are hita, mita, and medhya. The Gheranda-

Samhita and the Siva-samhita analyse these different aharas.

The food which contributes to the health of the body, is

known as hitahara. The food when taken, gladdens the

body and cheers the soul, is known as mitahara. The

medhyahara is that which stimulates the sattvic element in

the mind, and expressive faculties of the senses. This last

is obviously the best. It might be of interest to note the

ideal diet prescribed for the Yogin in the Gheranda

Samhita.

शाल्यन्नं यवपिंडं वा गोधूमपिंडकं तथा ।

मुद्गयूषं कालकादि शुभ्रं'च तुषवर्जितम् ॥

पटोलं पनसंचैव क्कोलेलंच सुकाशकम् ।

द्राधिका 'कर्कंटकी रम्भा झंझुबुरंच सुक्तनटकम् ॥

लघुपाकं प्रियं स्निग्धं यथा वा धातुपोषणम् ।

स्निग्धमिलषितं योगी दिव्यं भोजनमाचरेत् ॥ (34)

These recipes are required for the proper discharge of the

Yogin's activities. These will help him in attaining the

frame of mind, which is the first requisite for yogic practi-

ces. Caraka is also very clear on the necessity of having

proper diet for the maintenance of the health of body and

mind. In Sutra-sthanam. 27. 2. Caraka writes,

इष्टवर्णगन्धरसस्पर्शं विधिविहितमन्नपानं प्राणिनां प्राणसंश्रकानां प्राणमाचक्षते

कुशला: । प्रत्यक्षफलदर्शनात् तदिन्धनात् । ज्ञातव्ये : स्थितिः। तत्तु सत्चमुर्ज्जयति,

तच्च्छरोधातुनिबुहानादि-निद्राप्रसादकरं यथोक्तमुपसेव्यमानम् । विपरीतमहिताय

सम्पद्यते ।

The colour, smell, taste and touch of these food, which are

universally agreeable are the source of life or "prana" of

all animals. These include creatures, animate and inani-

mate, man and even trees. ..... With proper food, the

mind is strengthened, and it nourishes the physical elements

of the body, and satisfies the senses. The stand-points of the

Yogic texts on ahara, and of Caraka are not essentially

different from that of Bharata. Bharata equally recognises

the imperative need of ahara being hita, so that the reader

of kavya or the spectator of nataka, might become "soman-

assa". Bharata in Ch. 22. Sl. 90 (Vol. III G.O.S.) emphasizes

that the ahara brought in by all five senses, should be 'ista'.

If on the other hand, the ahara be anista (Ch. 22. Sl. 91)

and madhyastha (Ch. 22. Sl. 92), the spectator can never

become 'Samanassa', one of the two primary requisites for

proper aesthetic enjoyment (vide Ch. V).

If the evolution of Rasa must depend ultimately on the

nature of food taken in through the senses, the question

arises how this food undergoes a transformation and a

change. The food, which can be taken in by the mouth,

or the eye and the ear, goes to build up both body and soul.

The Chandyogya Upanishad is very definite on this point.

The great importance of food in the building of body and

mind has been beautifully analysed in the story of Sweta-

ketu, told in the Chandyogya 6. 7. 1—6. 10. 3. After going

without food for fifteen days, Swetaketu when asked by his

father to recite the Vedas, could not remember them. But

on taking food, his memory revived, and he could recite all

these. In 6. 6. 5, the Chandyogya writes, अन्तर्मये हि सौम्य मनः

आपोमयः प्रणस्तेजमयी वागिति भूय एव मा भगवान् विज्ञापयत्वित तथा

सोम्येति होवाच । (36)

The manas is thus being moulded by the kind of food that

is taken in through the indriyas. In 6. 8. 3-6, Swetaketu

repeats the question, "What is the origin of this body ?"

The father replied, "The origin of body is in the food that

is taken in". तस्यकमूलं स्यादनयत्रन्नादेवमेव खलु सोम्य ।

So the origin of Rasa as depending on the sensory impres-

sions is not peculiar to Bharata alone. It is as old as the

Upanishads, and has been developed in different directions

in Alamkara and Ayurveda.

All aharas are the result of the atman acting in the

capacity as Vaisvanara. The Mandukya-Upanishad speaks

of how the sentient soul, which is Vaisvanara, becomes

aware of the outside world. It is the first stage of the

evolution of soul, corresponding to the Vibhavas, which are

forms of ahara in Indian speculations. The Mandukya-

Upanishad (2. 3) writes, जाग्रत्स्थानो बहिष्प्रज्ञः सप्ताङ्ग एकोनविंशति-

मुखःस्थूलभुग्वैश्वानरः प्रथमः पादः ।

But while Vaisvanara is looking out for sensory impres-

sions, the taijasa division of the soul, which comes after

Vaisvanara, rests more on itself. It is less dependent on

54

the indriyas, and enjoys prajna. स्वप्रस्थानोऽन्तःप्रज्ञः सम्प्रांग

एकोनविंशतिमुखः प्रविचिक्त्मुख तैजसो द्वितीयः पादः ।

In the taijasa stage, the soul has travelled beyond mere receiving of

sensory impressions. In the third stage, there is susupti.

There is no more any hankering or desire for anything. He

rests in his sleep, and is without any disturbance. He

himself is of the nature of delight, and can enjoy objects of

delight without any sense of limitation. This is the prajna

stage of the soul.

The difference between bhava and rasa seems to be

this. While bhava is catering to the needs of Vaisvanara,

which is bahi-prajna, rasa is of the taijasa portion of the

soul, which is antara-prajna. Mm. Gangadhara, comment-

ing on "Dirgha-Jivitendriya" (Caraka. Sutra. I. 28) writes

how the bhutatman is two-fold, according as the pratyagat-

man is associated with the gross or subtle body.

स्थूलसूक्ष्मशरीरसम्बन्धो हि प्रत्यगात्मा द्विविधो भूतात्मा वैश्वानरस्तैजसश्चेति

The body and the soul being of the nature of ahara, and the

taking in of ahara being the peculiar activity of the Vaisva-

nara, it is of great importance to find out the part played by

Vaisvanara in Rasa evolution.

The atman acting in its capacity as Vaisvanara takes

in the whole world as its object of enjoyment. Mm. Ganga-

dhara writes, अतस्यानन्नं पथ्यसि प्रियं भवत्यस्य ब्रह्मावर्चसं कुले, य

एवमेवात्मनैवैश्वरमुपास्ते (37) (Jalpa-kalpa-taru. Calcutta p. 162)

But the taijasa atman shows a further refinement. When

the vaisvanara atman rests content in its own self, and

turns away from outside world, as if lost in sleep, then

taijasa atman comes into play. The taijasa atman shows a

further refinement, and the play of indriyas stops altogether.

Then the senses disappear in the manas, and the manas

with its three gunas, sattva, rajas and tamas, disappear in

the buddhi, and then the buddhi with its anukul and prati-

ful cognitions, disappears into mahat. So tamas disappears

into rajas, and rajas into sattva, and sattva itself disappears

in the avyakta. In the third stage of prajna, there is the

enjoyment by the Suddha-sattva of this purest delight. The

soul at this stage is deeply asleep or in susupti. At this

moment, the ahara of Vaisvanara has become the rasa of

prajna stage.

55

The bhutatman which takes in these aharas, is according to Mandukya Upanishad, divisible into two parts, (a) vaisvanara and (b) taijasa. The Chandyogya Upanishad analyses how all aharas contributes to the development of body and mind.

In 6. 5. 1, the Chandyogya Upanishad writes,

अन्नमशितं त्रेधा विधीयते, तस्य य स्थविष्ठो धातुस्तं पुरिषं भवति मध्यमस्तन्मांसं योऽणिष्ठः स मनः॥

Whatever is taken in divides itself into three parts; and the purest and most refined portion of it goes to replenish manas.

In 6. 5. 3, the Chandyogya speaks similarly of tejas.

तेजोऽशितं त्रेधा विधीयते तस्य यः स्थविष्ठो धातुस्तदस्थि भवति यो मध्यमः स मज्जा योऽणिष्ठः सा वाक्॥

In 6. 5. 4, the Chandyogya Upanishad sums up the position by saying, that the manas is entirely dependent on annas or ahara.

अन्नमयं हि सोम्य मनः आपोमयः प्राणस्तेजोमयी वागिति ॥ (38)

This anna or food on dividing itself into three parts, contributes to the development of manas, prana and vak. (6. 6. 5). The manas which is annamaya, does thus belong to the category of anna-brahma.

In analysing the concept of anna-brahma, the Chandyogya writes (7. 9. 1) that without anna, one loses sight, hearing or mind.

The Chandyogya again points out (7. 10. 1-4 ; 7. 11. 1-2) that apa and vak are superior to anna, though these latter would have been impossible without anna.

III

Caraka in the passage from Sutra-sthanam 27.2, discussed in Sec. II, speaks of varna, gandha, rasa, sparsa as 'anna' or ahara.

In Cikitsa-sthanam 28.4, Caraka finds the seat of prana-vayu in the five sense-organs, so that without this prana-vayu, there cannot be any kind of cognition.

The prana vayu alone can bring in sensory impressions.

It should be clearly understood that the Samkhya system recognises that nothing absolutely new is produced.

Effect is the developed stage of what was previously latent.

It is the manifestation of the implicit—Suksmanam murti-labha karyam. (Yukti-dipika, p. 31). The oil already exists in the sesamum; it is to be extracted by pressing; rice exists in the paddy, and husking is required to bring it out.

found that the effect or form is already immanent in the material cause, and efficient causes such as pressing and husking etc., can only help it to reveal itself. The manifestation of the unmanifest is creation ; the disappearance of the manifest into the unmanifested state is destruction. There is nothing in the universe which is absolutely new creation, or total destruction. Creation means that the unmanifest becomes charged with Rajas or Tamas. The infinite array of creation is the result of the infinite possible combinations of these three gunas, as also of the five primary elements—panca-bhautikopadana. The difference between different things may thus be either a difference in constituents or in qualities. The difference may again arise from a cause which is altogether different from the one, just discussed. It is how the one and the same thing may appear as different, when taken in through different senses. In other words, if the same thing be the āhāra of two different senses, how should it be described, or what should be its connotation ? Most physical things have an appeal to two or more senses. The same thing might have now a visual appearance, when taken in through the eyes ; when felt with the skin, it will have a tactual appeal ; and when taken in through the ears, the same thing will have audible appearance. But it is one thing all the same. In fact, the same object is now visual, now tactual and now again audible. It is different because it is being taken in through the different senses. The different grahaka indriyas are always giving different forms and shapes to the self-same things. Sringara and Madhura are one and the same ; Hasa and Amla are one. The thing when taken in through the mouth appears as madhura ; the same thing when taken in through the eyes and ears, and brought to the mind, appears as Sringara. It applies equally to Amla and Hasa.

It is to be noted that it is the same thing, which when taken in through the mouth appears as madhura. and amla, will appear at the next moment as Sringara and Hasa, when taken in through the eyes and ears. This philosophic standpoint knits together the two sister speculations of Ayurveda and Alamkara.

A comparison of the features of Sringara with Madhura, or Hasa with Amla, will reveal the truth of this contention. It is to be noted that the features of the first

six Rasas in Bharata correspond very closely to the charac-

ters of the six Rasas in Caraka and Susruta. Bharata thrice

refers to Sringara as madhura. First in speaking of the

anubhavas of Sringara, Bharata writes, नयनचातुर्यप्रविक्षेपकटाक्ष-

संचारललितमधुरांगहारवाक्यादिभिरनुभावैरभिनय: प्रयोक्तव्य: ।

Again in Ch. 6, sl. 48, Bharata writes,

नयनवदनप्रसादै: स्मित मधुरवचोधृतिप्रमोदैश्च

मधुररुचांग विकारैस्तस्यामिनय: प्रयोक्तव्य: ॥ (39)

The 'prasada' of Sringara referred to by Bharata has been

mentioned by Caraka as peculiar to Madhura—Sadindriya-

prasadana (Sutra. 26.41). Caraka speaks of madhura as

"Sthayiryakara" and Bharata speaks of Sringara as

fostering dhriti. Bharata goes further in identifying the

characteristics of Sringara with those of madhura. In Sutra-

sthanam. 26.42, Caraka speaks of sthaulyam mardabamalasya-

matiswapnam gaurabamannabhilasamagnidaurbalyam-asy a-

kanthayor-mamsa-avivridhim tatha . . . samjnaswara-

pranasa-gala-ganda . . . ityavam pravrittin kaphajanyadhina padayati40. Bharata in describing the vipralambha

of Sringara, writes, nirveda-glani-samkasuya

. . . nidra-

suptaswapna- vibhoka-vyadhi- unmadapasmara- jadyamara-

nadi-bhianubhavai-abhinetavya.41 All these are the charac-

teristic marks of Sringara. The man affected with Sringara

shows all the characteristics of a man affected with madhura.

In both cases, these are idleness (alasy a and nirveda), dream-

ing (swapna and nidra), and loss of consciousness (samjna-

swara - nasa and vyadhi - unmada - apasmara - jadya-

marandhi etc.).

If it be true that Sringara and Madhura are one and

the same thing, appearing differently because of the

difference of grahaka sense-organs, it is equally true of

Hasa and Amla. Abhinavagupta in discussing Hasa com-

pares it with the physical taste of acidity (Natya-sastra,

G.O.S. I, 314). Hemachandra in exact agreement with

Abhinavagupta, holds that the taste of Hasa and the taste

of acid are the same (Kavyanusasana. N. Sagar. p. 90). A

detailed comparison of the attending effects of these two will

reveal that these two Rasas are the same, though appear-

ing different, because of the difference in perceiving sense

organs.

58

Bharata in Ch. 6, sl. 55 (Banaras ed.) describes Hasa as follows :

उत्फुल्लाननत्रे स्तु गडे़विहसितेरथ ।

किंचिल्लक्षितदन्तं च हसितं तद्विधीयते ॥ (42)

Cheerful face and gleaming eyes, slightly visible teeth characterise the laughing man. Caraka in Sutra-sthanam. 26.44 also speaks sammilyatyaksinee and danta-harsa while describing Hasa. A restlessness, which speaks of the presence of Rajas, characterises all the anubhavas of Hasa. These anubhavas are according to Bharata, tasyaustha-damsana - nasakapola - spandana - dristivyakosa-akuncana-swedasyaraga - parsagrahanadi - bhiraunbhavairabhinaya prayoktabya. Caraka also holds that amla Rasa is pre-dominantly agneya in character, and increases pitta (Sutra. 26.44). This again is of the nature of Rajas ; and so the constituents of Hasa and Amla are very much alike. Susruta also holds that acid helps digestion because of its fiery nature.Pacaytyagneya swabhavat paridahati kanthamuro hrdayam cheti (Sutra-sthanam. 42.10).

Bharata repeatedly speaks of the watery eye and the inflated nose of a laughing man.

अस्यानहसितं यत्र सास्नेत्र तथा च ।

उत्कम्पियतांसकन्धशिरस्तद्वापभसितं भवेत् ॥

संरब्ध सास्नेत्र च विकृष्टस्वरमुद्रतम् ।

करौपगुटपार्श्व च तज्जातिहसितिं भवेत् ॥ (43)

The restlessness of Hasa, the shaking of head and of limbs, and laughter holding both its sides—all these are the manifestations of Rajasic elements in Hasa. Saradatanaya in Bhava-prakasa p. 44, also holds that there is pre-dominance of Rajas in Hasa. From the foregoing analysis, it must have been noticed that the constituents and after-effects of Hasa and Amla are the same.

Bharata speaks of alasya-avahithya-tandra-nidra-swapna-probodhasuya (Banaras ed. p. 74) as the vyabhi-charibhavas of Hasa. These reactions appear to be very different from the ones just cited. The difference is to be explained, as Caraka says, from the amount of acid, with which the man is treated. The appropriate amount of acid

will strengthen and stimulate the senses; there shall be watering of the mouth, and agni or fire shall be well-

sustained. अम्लोरसो तक् रोचयत्यग्रिं दीपयति देहं बृंहयत्युर्जयति मनो

बोधयतीन्द्रियाणि दृढीकरोति वलंचवद्रंयति, वातमनुलोमयति हृदयं तर्पयत्यास्य-

माश्रिति ............. (Sutra. 26.43).44 All these correspond to the anubhavas of Hasa, as analysed by Bharata. But there

will be different reactions if this acid be taken in excess.

These are according to Caraka, दन्तान् हर्षयतितलपर्ययति संमीलयत्य-

क्षिणी संवोजयति रोमानि कर्फं विलाययति...... (Sutra 26. 44) (45)

रक्तं दृषयति, मांसं विदहति,

कायं शिथिलीकरोति.......

These become in Bharata, alasyavahitya-tandra-nidra-

swapna etc. It will be seen how closely does Bharata follow Ayurvedic speculations.

The striking similarity between Hasa and Amla does not end here. Bharata speaks of a six-fold division of hasa.

(6.51b, Banaras ed.). Susruta in Uttaratantra, 63.5, also speaks of a six-fold division of amla. It might be of interest

to note further that the dasavastha of Sringara in Bharata (Banaras ed. p. 73), might have been influenced by the ten-

fold division of Madhura in Susruta (Uttara-tantra. 63. 5).

That this is no idle guess will be appreciated, when it is remembered that Hemacandra in Kavyanusasana, compares

Hasa with amla-dadima. In p. 90 (Nir. Sagar ed. 1934), Hemacandra describe Hasa as follows : यथा अम्लादिःमादिर-

स्वादवैचित्र्यादपि द्रव्यान्तरकार्यानुरूपदर्शनात् सङ्क्रमणस्वभावः, तथाहासादिप

सङ्क्रामति, काये ।

Abhinavagupta similarly holds in Abhinava-Bharati (G.O.S. V. 1. p. 316) यथाम्लादिमादिरसास्वादः

सङ्क्रमणमावोऽन्यत्रापि दन्तोद-

कविकारानुरूपसङ्क्रमदर्शनादेव सङ्क्रामति ।

Both Abhinavagupta and Hemacandra are agreed that Hasa and Amla are very similar in their after-effects.

So deep-rooted is the philosophic basis of this problem, and so close is the resemblance between the Rasas in Bharata and their counterparts in Ayurveda, that any super-

ficial examination will at once reveal the identity of the two. This could never have been accidental, and Bharata seems

to have consciously drawn upon the speculations of the Ayurveda. Bharata speaks of the following anubhavas of

11 (OP 179)

60

karuna. These are, asrupatana-paridevana-mukhasashana-

karuna. vaivarṇa-srasṭagaṭrata-niswasa - smṛtivilopadibhivanubhavai-

rabhinaya projokṭabya.⁴⁶ These anubhavas have been asso-

ciated with Karuna by all leading writers on Alamkara. But

it has not been noticed that Susruta in Sutra-sthanam. 42. 11,

associates gatra-kandu, vaivarṇa and mukha-paka with an

excess of salt. Susurta writes, evavyarthama-sevyamana

gaṭra-kandu - kothasopha-vaivarṇa-pumsattva-upaghatendriya-

upatapan tatha mukha-kshipakam ....... pravṛittinapadayati.

The parallelism between Karuna and Lavana is not

confined to anubhavas alone. The vyabhicāribhavas of

Karuna are strikingly similar to the after-effects of a treat-

ment with salt. Bharata refers to the following vyabhicāri-

bhavas of Karuna. These are nirveda, glāni, moha, visāda,

dainya, jadatā, unmada and apasmāra. These are compar-

able to the after-effects of a treatment with an excess of salt.

Caraka in Sutra-sthanam, 26.46, writes, sa evam guno-

ṇyakeyatva-arthanupa-yujyamāṇas pittam kopayati,

apyekayati vardhayati, tarsayati, murchayati, mohayati,

tapayati, darayati-....... pumstvamupahanti indriyānya-

uparunādhi.⁴⁷ Swooning (murcha) and stupor (moha, jadatā)

are present equally in karuṇa and lavana.

The points of similarity between Raudra and Kaṭu

(astringent) are again very striking. The Kāryas or attendant

effects of Raudra, are according to Bharata, tadana-pataṇa-

pidana-cchedana-bhedaṇa-prahaṛaṇa ....... kāryaṇi. Caraka

writes in Sutra-sthanam. 26. 47, sneha-sweda-kleda-malanu-

pathanti, rochayatasamam, kandum vilālayati ... krimin

hinasti, māmsam vilekhayati, soneta-samghaṭam vinatti, van-

dhānścinatti, margan vivṛinoti, slesmanam samayati, laghu-

usṇa rukṣmascha. Suśruta also says of astringent : Sthāuly-

alasyākapha-krimi-viśaukstha-kandu-prasamana Sandhivan-

dha-vicchedano-avasadana sthānya-sutra-medasaṃ-upahanta

ceti. The adverse effects of Raudra on mind and astringent

on body are very similar.

The anubhavas of Raudra also seem to follow very

closely the attendant after-effects of a treatment with astrin-

gent. Caraka speaks of the following after effects of a treat-

ment with astringents. Vaktram sodhayati, agnim deepayati,

bhuktam soshayati, ghranamasravayati, cakku-virechayati,

sputikaroti-indriyāṇi (Sutra. 26. 47).⁴⁸ Bharata writes, rakta-

nayana ..... bhrukuti - kara-dantaustha-pidana-ganda-sphu-

rana-hastagra-nishpesadibhi-ranubhavai-vabhinaya prayok-

tabya.49 Of these rakta-nayana corresponds to Caraka's

cakkhu-virechayati, while the rest come under Caraka's sputi-

karoti-indriyani. Bharata's kara-dantaustha-pidana-ganda-

sphurana is again very close to Susruta's kara-charana-parsa-

prabhitisu cha vata-sulanapadayati.

So close and conscious are Bharata's borrowings from

the Ayurveda that the parallelism of the vyabhicharibhavas

of Raudra extends even to the after-effects of a treatment

with an excess of astringent. The vyabhicharibhavas of

Raudra are, according to Bharata, sammoha, abega, capalata,

augra, sweda, vepathu, romanca and gadagada. Caraka holds

that there is an excess of vayu in astringent rasa, and an

excess of astringent will bring about diseases of vayu. apicha

vayvagni-gunavahulyayat bhrama-mada-vamathu-kampa-toda-

vikaran upajanayati (Sutra-sthanam. 26.48)50 It should be

clearly noted that of the ten vyabhichari-bhavas of Raudra

noted by Bharata (Banaras ed. p. 76), the last four are

sattvika-bhavas, and as such, share the characteristic effects

of vayu vikara (vide Ch. VII). The rest with their excess of

movement show distinct traces of vayu. Abega, capalata,

augra and utsaha in Bharata with their restless activities,

show the same predominance of vayu in them.

Bharata's Vira and Caraka's Tikta or bitter present the

same broad points of resemblance. The vibhavas of Vira

according to Bharata'are, asam-moha, adhyavasaya etc ; its

anubhavas are sthayiya, dhairya and vaisaradya. It is of

the nature of utsaha, and works against stupor and frigidity

(6.67 Banaras ed.). Both Susruta and Caraka hold that tikta

also works against stupor and fainting. Susruta writes in

Sutra-sthanam 42.13, tiktaschedano rochana deepana ....

murchajvaraprasamana stanyasodhana ... vasapayopaso-

shamscheti. Bharata's asammoha echoes Susruta's murcha-

jvaraprasamana with reference to bitter. Caraka similarly

holds that it is visaghna, krimighna, murchadaha-

kandukustha trsnaprasamana (Sutra. 26.49). This is not all.

The anubhavas of Vira distinctly echo Caraka's analysis of

bitter. These anubhavas are sthairya-dhairya-tyaga-

vaisaradyadibhiranubhavairabhinaya prajaktavya. With

62

Caraka, the anubhavas or after-effects of a treatment with

bitter are tvang-mamsayas sthirikarana, jvaraghna, deepana,

pacana, sthanya-sodhana lekhana. Steadfastness or sthairya-

karana characterises both Vira and tikta.

Vaisaradya is again an important anubhava of Vira in

Bharata. This corresponds to the cleansing power of bitter,

as analysed by Susruta and Caraka. Caraka in Sutra-sthanam

26.49, writes sthanya-sodhana lekhana, clearly showing the

very great affinity of Raudra with bitter. The vyabhichari-

bhava of Vira, romanca again shows this close approxima-

tion of the two Rasas. Romanca being a sattvikabhava, is

dominated by vayu (vide Ch. VII). Bitter in Caraka also

shows this predominance of vayu (Sutra-sthanam. 26.50).

All these show the very striking points of resemblance

between the speculations of Susruta, Caraka and Bharata.

One further point of resemblance between these two

kindred speculations might be noted. Caraka in Sutra-

sthanam 26.49 and Susruta in Sutra-sthanam, 42.13, speak

of a kindling into activity after a course of bitter rasa. This

is known as deepana. Abhinavagupta in G.O.S. I.325, holds

utsaha and uddipana as the life and soul of Vira.

The parallelism between Bharata's bhayanaka and

Caraka's kasaya or insipid deserves to be carefully noted.

The anubhavas of bhayanaka are pravepita-kara-carana-

nayana - calana - pulaka - mukha - vaivarṇa - swara-

bhedadibhi-ranubhavai-abhinaya prajaktavya. These corres-

pond to Susruta's analysis of the effects produced by

insipid rasa. These are manya-sthambha-gatra-sphurana-

chumuchumayanakunchana-ksanapravrittin janayati (Sutra-

sthanam. 42.14).51 Vaivarnya and Swarabheda are not

strictly speaking anubhavas, but are really speaking sattvi-

kabhavas, with an excess of vayu. Caraka himself subscribes

to this view when he says that an excess of insipidity will

bring about diseases of vayu (Sutra-sthanam. 26.52).

Bharata seems to have been aware of the very close

resemblance between bhayanaka and its counterpart, kasaya

in Ayurveda. Stambha, sweda, vepathu, swarabheda and

vaivarṇa are all sattvika-bhavas, showing a predominance

of vayu. The characteristic features of bhayanaka Rasa are

very similar to the characteristic features of Kasaya in

Caraka. In Bharata, these are

63

गात्रामुखडष्टिभेदैरूरुस्तम्भाभिवोक्षणोद्रे हौः ।

सन्मुस्वशोषहृदय स्पन्दनरोमोद्रगमैश्च भयम् ॥

... ...

करचरणावेपथुस्तम्भगात्रहृदयप्रकम्पेन ।

श्वासोष्टनालकम्पैर्मैगनको नित्यमस्निथः ॥ 6.70,72 (52)

श्वासोष्टनालकम्पैर्मैगनको नित्यमस्निथः ॥ 6.70,72 (52)

The characteristic features of bhayanaka, according

to Bharata, are stambha, drying up of mouth (mukha-sosa)

and palpitation of heart (hrdaya-spandana). It is very

interesting to note that Caraka also speaks of stambha as a

result of an excess treatment with insipid rasa. (Sutra. 26.51).

Mukha-sosa and hrdaya-spandana in Bharata’s bhayanaka

seem to have been taken over from Caraka’s asyam sosayati,

hrdayam pidayatyudaram-adhma-payati (Sutra. 26.52).53

Susruta also holds that there is hrid-pidasyasosa-udara-

dhvana with an excess of Kasaya (Sutra. 42.14).

Bharata’s analysis of the vyabhicharibhavs of

bhayanaka is again very close to the reactions of a treat-

ment with an excess of Kasaya. The vyabhicharibhavs of

bhayanaka are stambha, sweda, gadagada, romanca, vepathu,

swarabheda, vaivarṇa, saṅka, moha and trasa, and

apasmara. These vyabhicharibhavs show all the symptoms

of an excess of vayu, and as such, have been included among

the sattvika-bhavas. These are all the characteristic traits

of a treatment with an excess of kasaya, which will inevit-

ably lead to such diseases as are vataja (Caraka. Sutra.

26.62).

Such extensive and wide-spread parallelisms even in

details could never have been accidental. It is not just a

case of parallelism. Bharata seems to have consciously

drawn upon the speculations of Indian Ayurveda. It will be

seen later on how deeply the concepts of sattvikabhava in

ch. VII and vyabhicharibhava in ch. VIII have also been

influenced by kindred speculations in the Ayurveda. It is

enough to note for the present that Sringara and Madhura,

Hasa and Amla, Raudra and Katuka, Karuna and Lavana

are but manifestations of one entity, which is now being

taken in through the eyes and ears, and at the next moment,

is tasted through the mouth. (See Ch. III).

64

IV

Bharata’s Rasa-sutra, vibhava-anubhava-vyabhichari-

samyogena rasanishpatti gives a prominent place to vibhava

or ahara. From the foregoing analysis, it will have been

noticed that the vibhavas which are indriyartha are taken

in by the indriyas, and the message is sent forward to the

manas. The Aramana in Abhidhamma analysis provides

the starting point of a process of evolution, which culmi-

nates in the realisation of Rasa. But there is a long gap

between the first beginnings in vibhava and their culmina-

tion in Rasa. Most writers on Indian Alamkara look at

Rasa-realisation as instantaneous. But cognition in Indian

analysis shall have to pass through indriya (sense), manas

(mind), buddhi (intellect) and atman (soul). The very real

difference between jnana and bodha, between intellectual

apprehension and aesthetic appreciation is to be explained

from this standpoint. It appears that while jnana or

intellectual apprehension is of the mind, bodha or aesthetic

appreciation is of the very nature of the soul. So bodha

shows a further refinement, a subtler consistence, than what

is possible in jnana.

The outside world, which is ahara with the followers

of Patanjala, arammanaa with the Buddhists, vibhava with

the Alamkarikas, provides us with a number of stimuli.

These stimuli cannot be satiated unless these rest in the

soul (atma-visranti). The citta takes on the character of the

object (visayakara-vritti), when the citta takes in the object

of sense through the indriya. The ahara of the world of

sense, indriya, citta and its vritti, all these are of the nature

of jada. Whatever is jada, is by nature non-revealing. But

at the moment of bodha, this naturally non-revealing jada

substance comes to reveal itself. But revelation or flashing-

forth, spuradrupata does not belong to any of these. It

belongs exclusively to atma-caitanya or soul-substance. So

things of the outside world, the ahara of Patanjala or

vibhava of Bharata cannot flash forth or become vibrant,

except with the participation of soul. These messages or

stimuli of the outside world are brought close to caitanya

by the indriyas and citta-vritti, so that these messages them-

selves might take on the character of the soul. Jada vastu

can only reveal itself with the participation of atma-

65

caitanya. This sphurana or revelation of jada-vastu at the

moment of bodha, is thus made possible by the participation

of atma-caitanya ; and so the expressiveness of the outside

jada world is completely dependent on atma-caitanya.

There is a world of difference between the knowledge

of a thing (jñana) and its imaginative or aesthetic appre-

hension. The citta-vritti taking on the character of the object

of sense, may be called the jñana or knowledge of it. So

this jñana is also of the nature of jada. But when there is

an imposition of caitanya on this citta-vritti, then it is called

anubhava or bodha. It should be clearly noted that vritti

and bodha, knowledge and apprehension are two very dis-

tinct things, vritti being jada, bodha being ajada or cit-

svarupa. This has been very clearly established in the

Samkhya analysis. Vijnana-bhikshu says in Samkhya-sara

. . . “Vivekavrittibodhayoo tarkika yatra sammoda, sam-

khyanaṁ srestata jatas. Jñatma-sruta-muda eemay bandha-

stamasina, vritti-bodha-avivekana menire ksanikam citim”.

Vijnana-bhikshu means by this that ignorant people cannot

appreciate the distinction between vritti and bodha, or

knowledge of a thing and the apprehension of it. The

Samkhya teachers have very clearly analysed the distinc-

tive qualities of knowledge (jñana) and apprehension (bodha).

But the Naiyaikas seem not to have understood this differ-

ence very well. In the Nyaya-sutra (I. 1.15), Gotama writes,

buddhi-rupalabhidjñanamityanarthantaram. Intellect, appre-

hension and knowledge—these are not different from one

another. The term apprehension (upalabdhi) is generally

used in the sense of perception (pratyakṣa). According to

Samkhya analysis, buddhi stands next to puruṣa, in the order

of involution, and is, as such, altogether different from

knowledge (jñana), the abode of transparent consciousness.

Gotama says that jñana and upalabdhi are identical, though

it has been just noted how they are essentially different. It

appears from this that the very real difference between

jñana and bodha was not well-understood by the Naiyaikas.

The Srutis also speak of atman as of the nature of know-

ledge. The Buddhists also did not clearly recognise the

difference between jñana and bodha, and look upon vritti-

jñana as soul itself. This vrittijñana is by nature, short-

lived, and is destroyed in a moment (ksṇa-vidhamsi). This

has led the Buddhist philosophers to think that soul itself

is destroyed in a moment. But really speaking, the atman

which has been called as of the nature of jnana in the

Srutis, means something very different from vritti-jnana. It

is, on the other hand, of the nature of bodha or apprehension. Vritti-jnana might be of a short duration ; but bodha

is everlasting. The Buddhists could not distinguish between

transient jnana and eternal bodha. They were thus led to

believe that the soul itself is transitory. The Bodha is of

the nature of purusa ; the vritti-jnana is of the nature of

citta. The purusa is cetana, while the citta is jada. So jada-

vastu can flash out or become vibrant only when it rests in

atma-caitanya. In Rasa-realisation, the taking-in of the

objects of sense by indriyas is the result of the activity of

citta. The message brought in by the senses through the

mediation of vayu, is then transferred to caitanya. Thus

far, there is no great difference between the receptions of

messages of the outside world by different indriyas, between

aharas tasted by the tongue and aharas taken in through

the eye and the ear. But still there is a world of difference

between apprehension of sense-objects in life, and the

apprehension of sense-objects in art.

The difference between these two apprehensions

seems to be this. At the moment of apprehension of objects

in the world of sense, the caitanya flashes forth as just

cit-matra. But there is in this atma-caitanya, a natural love

of ananda, which resists sorrow. This ananda seated in the

soul naturally flashes out ; but the citta being excessively

disturbed, and turned outward (bahya-pravanata), cannot

reflect the clear stream of ananda. In other words, though

the soul goes on reflecting ananda, the reflection itself

becomes unmanifest. At the moment of Rasa-realisation,

the citta is turned away from all outward motivation by

the help of vibhava, anubhava and vyabhicharibhava. There

is a flow of the purified sattva of the citta ; at the same time,

the citta becomes perfectly calm like a tranquil sheet of

water. There is a mirroring and reflection of the ananda

of the atma-caitanya in this surface of the citta. The mani-

festation of the joyful (anandarupata) nature of the soul

(atma-caitanya) is Rasa-enjoyment. When the purified sattvic

citta-vritti, which has become extremely refined, and is

completely introvert and turned back upon itself, then there

is a reflection of the joyous nature of the atman in this

67

vritti of the citta. There is no such reflection of this joyous

nature of soul in ordinary citta-vrittis. But at the moment

of Rasa-enjoyment, the citta becomes extremely refined

and subtle, though not completely so (see Ch. IV). This

results in the manifestation of citta-vrittis, which are now

introvert. The bliss of the soul is reflected in this citta-

vritti ; and thus there is the realisation of Rasa. This bliss

or ananda being of the nature of soul, reveals itself. At

the moment of Rasa-enjoyment, the citta in its purified

Sattvic state of vritti, colours and makes manifest the un-

manifest soul. The soul thus goes on enjoying through the

mediation of citta. Taste and things tasted are thus the same

thing, appearing differently from the standpoint of karma

and kriya, or action and passion in Aristotelian analysis.

This explains how there can never be complete purification

of the soul in Rasa-enjoyment. This purification of the

Sattva has necessarily got to be of an aprakita nature. The

citta at the moment of Rasa-enjoyment, completely disso-

ciates itself from all extrovert attitudes, and becomes per-

fectly introvert. Mammata also speaks of this bahya-

baimukhya-pada of the Rasa-enjoyer at the moment of Rasa-

enjoyment. The poet is trying to do the same thing as the

ascetic. The ascetic achieves this introversion of citta by

long and continued penance. He checks the outward flow

of the citta, and makes it turn inward. The poet achieves

this introversion through the magic of colour, rhythm and

alamkara. This is a less arduous process of purification, but

no less effective than the one used by the Yogins.

It is not always understood that the extrovert citta is

the cause of all sorrows, while the introversion of the citta

contributes to pleasure and delight. If a man can withdraw

his citta-vrittis from the outside world, and rests content

in his own self, then he can be supremely happy. Such a

state is life in a second heaven. The reading of plays and

poems is such an instrument for achieving this life, where

all faculties have been withdrawn. The sahrdaya at the

moment of Raja-enjoyment becomes completely self-

absorbed, and loses all sense of the outside world. This is

what is known in Rasa-enjoyment as tanmayi-bhava. It has

been noticed at the beginning of this chapter, that vibhavas

appear to the citta as āhāra. The citta takes in these vibhavas

as bhoga. As a result of enjoying the vibhavas or bhogya-

12 (OP 179)

vastu, there is in the citta an emergence of an extremely

refined sattva. The emergence of this refined sattva makes

the citta turn away from things of sense. So an apprehen-

sion of things of sense will inevitably lead to a turning

away from them. The height of enjoyment always goes with

complete renunciation ; and this is apparent in aesthetic

appreciation more than in anything else. The excellence of

aesthetic delight is that at such a moment the citta cannot

take in anything else. The citta becoming completely self-

absorbed, is compelled to renounce things of sense as such.

The great difference between enjoyment of ordinary things

of sense, and enjoyment of things in the world of art, is

this. The enjoyment of ordinary things of sense always

increases an appetite for it ; na jatu kama kamanam-upabho-

gena samyati. But in the enjoyment of Rasa, the citta is

completely satisfied, and becomes perfectly detached from

the sensuousness of objects of pleasure. The enjoyment in

ordinary life can never satisfy all our wants. Either there is

a sense of excess of enjoyment, or there is a feeling of hidden

want. There is never a completed sense of satisfaction. This

absence of satiety keeps alive the hankering after things of

sense ; but a completed sense of satiety is just opposed to

this. In the satiated soul, there is no hankering after objects

of enjoyment. The Bhagavad Gita writes,

यं लब्ध्वा चापरं लाभं मन्यते नाधिकं ततः ।

यस्मिन् स्थितो न दुःखेन गुरुणापि विचाल्यते ॥ (54)

A satiated condition of the soul is possible only when that

something has already been achieved, which leaves nothing

more to be desired. In such a condition of completed satis-

faction, the body and the mind and senses, all become lax.

The prana which is the source of all activities, and which is

the source of all activities, and which is seated in the hrdaya

(see Sec. I) is hardly able to keep the body alive. It cannot

send or direct the indriyas to receive the message ; the

manas cannot be determined (samkalpayukta) in the absence

of prana. At this moment, the movement of prana is per-

fectly balanced. Prana rests in samya. To say that the

movement of prana rests in a perfect equipoise, is to say

that the movement of prana has almost ceased. The body

and the senses are restless, when the movement of prana

becomes uneven. The body and the senses go out and seek

69

new pleasures. But with the even movement of prana, when

a perfect equipoise has been reached, a state is arrived at

which is just opposed to this. In Rasa-enjoyment, what is

enjoyment in outward appearance becomes complete renun-

ciation on a closer analysis. The enjoyment of common

objects of pleasure always increases the appetite of it. But

in the enjoyment of objects of art, the things of sensuous

apprehension instead of whetting the appetite, foster the

the ideals of renunciation. In a word, the man instead of

being self-centred, becomes self-composed. In susupti, the

jiva even when living and motivated and directed by prana

to new sources of pleasure, cannot take in these, because

of a completed sense of satisfaction. Then the body and the

mind and the senses become irresponsive. They are averse

to sensory gratification. But there is such a divine sense of

pleasure that in susupti, the highly wrought and expectant

jiva lets go the objects of pleasure out of his own accord.

At such a moment, the outside world of sense can only be

a source of displeasure. It is very similar to the case of a

sensuous man when resting with his dearest wife. At the

moment of their union, the sensuous man loses all sense of

reality. He can no longer distinguish between what is out-

side and what is in ; he cannot take in either outside objects

or objects which are in him. He makes no distinction

between sleep and waking. All duality ceases. The Prajna-

payavinisayasiddhi. IV. i, writes, "If one gives up both

extremes (the extreme of the void and the extreme of the

non-void), one is set free. The idea of an ego has no longer

any support. For this reason, the dualistic mode (of think-

ing, which always enslaves us), must be given up". So also

at the moment of Rasa-realisation, the citta being complete-

ly satisfied with the vibhavas, loses all sense of distinction,

and rests in its own self. This is what may be called atma-

visranti. In atma-visranti, the citta becomes detached from

sensuous things. The citta is always taking on the character

of objects of sense. But there are methods prescribed in the

Yoga-sutra of making the citta free from all objectifications.

These are difficult methods and not easily achieved. The

citta on the other hand, can easily become free from all

objectifications through the reading of plays and poems.

The reader of a poem or the spectator of a play becomes

expectant, when the poet or the dramatist brings before

70

him a new world of vibhavas. In his eager expectation of

receiving the vibhavas of the poem and the play, there is

a change in the citta of the reader or of the spectator. There

is submergence of the inhibited visayas, already present in

the citta of the reader along with the new visayas, freshly

presented to him by the poem and the play. The objectifica-

tions in the world of art have reached a perfect balance

and harmony with those others, already present in an

inhibited form in the mind of the reader or the audience.

A detailed analysis of how this submergence takes place

will be made in Ch. X. The citta which is always gathering

messages of the outside world through the hrdaya, is very

often lost in the details of what it has collected. But the

vibhavas in poems and plays, act as a very fine and delicate

purgative. The fresh materials presented in poems, come

to combine with the inhibitions already there in the mind

of the audience ; and these then go out together, leaving

the citta untainted and purified. The citta then turns back

on itself. At such a moment, there is an enjoyment of

pleasure, which knows no hindrance or limitations, and

where all passions have subsided. Such a state is unattain-

able for creatures of the world. Only an approximation is

possible in Rasa-enjoyment. There is no better method of

achieving this purification than by the reading of poems

and plays. In aesthetic enjoyment, what is thus bhoga to

outward view, shows the highest ideals of tyaga.

The reason why the citta can never be balanced, is

that it is always burdened with impurities. These impur-

ities are always throwing the citta off its balance. But the

moment these impurities are removed, the citta goes on

expanding, and attains a perfectly balanced state. There is

a vispharana of the citta. The impurities of the citta are

contracting the citta, and retarding its expansion. There

cannot be any ananda or delight, when the citta is con-

tracted. The citta is naturally of an expansive nature. But

the citta loses this expansiveness, when it becomes impure.

The citta expands, and regains its original balance, even

with the temporary removal of impurities. At this moment,

there is a bursting out of pleasure and delight. There will

be ecstatic delight if by any way whatsoever the citta could

have been made to expand. Among all commonly practised

methods for effecting this expansion of the citta, the

influence of literature is by far the best. There is this expansion of the citta in all cases, excepting in those who are unusually resistant to all sense of beauty. This is the moment of aesthetic enjoyment. All the particular phases of the citta are comprehended in this state, when the citta, which is at balance, pervades all particular phases of it. There is no conflict in this state being present in all these different manifestations of the citta. But no particular manifestation can be comprehended in another particular manifestation ; because particulars are always at war with one other. The universal content of gold is present in all particular manifestations of it, in the shape of necklace, or a bangle or a bracelet. But a necklace is not comprehended in a bangle ; and it can never be. If it were possible to enjoy the universal content of Rasa, underlying all particular manifestations of it, like Sringara and Hasa, or Madhura and Amla, then the delight arising out of it, would be unlimited. But the enjoyment of a particular manifestation can never give this uncircumscribed and unlimited sense of delight. The citta which has regained its balance, is not impeded in any way. But the limited citta, with its motivations, is almost always impeded, and is a bar to the free and detached enjoyment of aesthetic pleasure.

The great importance of Vibhavas is to be studied, from this stand-point. Vibhavas help in the restoration and gaining back of the original balance. It has already been noticed that this balanced state is the universal content of all particular manifestations. Vibhavas which replenish the lost sufficiency, thus help in gaining back the original balance, just as ahara in Ayurveda is to make good the deficiency of depleted dhatus, as also of the mala dhatus (Caraka. Sutra-sthanam. 28.3). Caraka in Sutra-sthanam. 28.2. writes, how a balance of dhatu and mala must be effected. In 28.3, he says further that just as bodies are the result of foods and drinks, so also diseases are born out of foods and drinks. It is useful to remember that bodies are 'bhava', a source of troubles and disquiet. There is happiness only when the bhava is free from the play of Rajas and Tamas. This freedom is possible, because there is Sakti, which is of the nature of aprakrita visuddha sattva.

72

V

Bharata in Ch. VI describes the process of Rasa-realisation. In p: 288-9 of Natya-Sastra (G.O.S.) Vol. I, Bharata writes, “Yatha hi nanavyanjanusadhi-dravya-samyogadrasa-nishpattir bhavati. Yatha hi-gudadibhir-dravyair-vyanjanau-sadhibhischa sadadayoo rasa nirvar-tante tatha nana-bhavopagata api sthayino bhava rasattvam-apnuvanti . . . Yatha hi nanavyanjana-samskritam annam bhunjana rasanaswadayanti sumanassa purusa harsadinscha-dhigacchanti, tatha nanabhavabhinayavyanjita vaganga-sattvapetan sthayibhavan-aswadayanti sumanassa prekshaka

This illustrative reference to the evolution of Rasa has been taken to mean that Bharata was drawing upon paka-sastra, and had nothing to do with the wider philosophical background of the problem, which underlies the speculations of both Bharata and Ayurveda. Mm. P. V. Kane in his “History of Sanskrit Poetics”, p. 346 (1951) notes how Bharata’s Rasa-concept was influenced by paka-sastra. The textual support of Mm. Kane and of those others who are satisfied with explaining away Bharata’s Rasa-sutra as a branch of paka-sastra, seems to be the following statement of Abhinavagupta. Abhinavagupta writes explaining the text of Bharata. “Dravyam gudadi esam paka-kramena samyagyojanarupat-kusala-sampadyat-samyogat”. Again “etaduktam bhavati. Pakarupaya samyag-yojanaya tarat-alaulika rasa jayate”. These texts have been interpreted to mean that the background of Bharata’s Rasa-speculations is the paka-sastra.

But it appears that when Bharata was speaking of the evolution of Rasa, and Abhinavagupta was comparing the process of evolution as very similar to that in Paka-sastra, they are thinking only of the change that comes over bhava as a result of paka. The root “pacati” means not merely cooking ; it also means “coming to a fruition” or a change. This last meaning comprehends all the different senses in which paka may be used. Abhinavagupta in speaking of paka was referring to the change which comes over bhava at the moment of Rasa-realisation. Paka pre-supposes the existence of Sakti. Bharata’s awareness of the presence of Sakti is evident once again in his Sakti in Rasa enjoyment.

reference to visuddha-sattva as the soul of Rasa. (See Chs. IV and V).

The fruition of anna is not in itself ; it looks forward to apa. The fruition of apa again is not in itself ; it looks forward to tejas. It appears that the Chandyoga Upanishad tacitly recognises the gradual evolution and refinement of

tejas from its first beginnings in anna. The activity of tejas thus presupposes the existence of both anna, which is of the nature of ahara, and apa which is prana. This is very striking, for anna without apa, cannot undergo any change. If

anna had been heated alone without any apa, anna itself would be destroyed, and there would be no paka. If on the other hand, apa had been heated without anna, there could again be no change, for pure apa without an admixture with

kshiti, does not undergo a change. Paka is only possible when anna in annamaya kosha mixes with apa in the prana-maya kosha, and the two together are processed by fire or tejas of the manomaya kosha. This is the paka, which Bharata

and Abhinavagupta had in mind, when they spoke of Rasa-evolution as the result of paka. Rasa-evolution is only a processing and a change of the original ahara in the form of vibhava, and its gradual sublimation in the manomaya stage. The Vaicesika analysis speaks of this paka, which

comes over "kshiti" in the presence of water. Pure water, however it may be heated, undergoes no change. But in the presence of earth, an apparent change comes over water. This change, according to the Vaicesika analysis, takes place

in the atomic plane, or in paramanu. (Bhasa-pariccheda. 105). So also "anna" in the presence of "apa" shows marks of change, when tejas is applied to it. This is the paka, spoken of by the Upanishads, as also in the Vaicesika system, This

is also the paka, spoken of by Bharata and Abhinavagupta, as meaning only a change from one state to another. The emergence of Rasa from bhava is as definitely a change from one state to another, as the preparation of soup from

its raw materials and ingredients. It should be noted that while Bharata stops with the manomaya kosha, where the work of tejas begins, the Upanishads pass on to discuss further stages of sublimation in akasa, smriti and asa

(Chandyogya, 7, 12-14). It is well-known how this analysis leads to more and more comprehension, until the perfection of bhuma is reached (Chandyogya. 7. 24.2). But it appears

that Bharata feels that a work of art cannot proceed with

this purificatory process beyond the sattva-suddi stage. This

stage is confined to manomaya kosha. This is possible

because the concept of paka, which has very largely domi-

nated early aesthetic sepculations, is also centred in manas,

which is the seat of tejas.

VI

Caraka's ahara-mulabhyam rasa together with the

Upanishadic ahara-suddhan sattva-suddhi seems to have

paved the way for Bharata's Rasa-speculations. If Rasa be

rooted in ahara, then good and healthy food should make for

a healthy mind. The Chandogya Upanishad (7.26.2) writes

how beginning with ahara-suddhi, a process is set in motion

which leads to emancipation. With ahara-suddhi, the sattva

becomes purified ; with the purification of sattva, steadfast

smriti or memory is to be had ; and with the attainment of

this perfection of memory, which knows no limitations of

space and time, the citta is set free. The great importance

of this passage from the Chandyogya Upanishad is that here

it is clearly recognised that the mind is entirely dependent

on the nature and quality of food, that is taken in by the

body.

This concept of the necessity of having purified ahara

for the attainment of a purified sattva, seems to have deeply

influenced the speculations of the writers on rasa. The in-

sistence on having particular vibhavas or aharas in the case

of particular Rasas, seems also to proceed from this consi-

deration. For instance, in the case of Sringara, the appro-

priate vibhavas are according to Bharata,

Rtu-malayalam karai janagandharba-kavya-sevabhi

Upavana-gamana-viharai sringara-rasa samudbhavati56

(G.O.S. vol. I. 6.54).

In the case of Hasya, the appropriate vibhavas or aharas

again, are sa cha vikrita-paravesalamkara-dharstya-laulya

kuhakasatpralapa-vyanga-darsana dosa - daharanadibhirvi-

bhaval-rupadyate.57 (G.O.S. v. 1 p. 313-4), and so on with each

of these Rasas. It has already been noticed how close is the

parallelism between the after-effects of a treatment with madhura and the attendant effects of sringara, or those of amla with their counterparts in hasa. What is to be noted here is this. Just as certain specific things, unmixed with others, are prescribed for particular Rasas in Ayurveda, so also certain vibhavas which are no less ahara than those prescribed in Ayurveda, contribute to the evolution of particular Rasa.

The prescription of particular ahara for the promotion of a specific Rasa is well-known in Ayurveda. In Sutra-sthanam, Ch. 27, Caraka discusses different ahara or anna, as contributing to the evolution of these different Rasas. In this chapter on appropriate food and drinks, Caraka discusses in detail how different kinds of food help promote a particular Rasa. This knowledge is very important for the physician of the body, as also for the physician of the soul.

Caraka discusses for instance, the Rasa-content of different varieties of paddy with tendrils (Sutra. 27. 5-9), of different kinds of meat as contributing to these different Rasas (Sutra. 27, 10-25). Caraka discusses the Saka-varga, the phala-varga, the harita-varga, the nadya-varga, jala-varga, dugdha-varga, ikshu-varga and many more. Caraka discusses in all twelve categories of food (Sutra. 27.62). All these are contributing to the development of the body and the soul. In Sutra-sthanam 28.2, Caraka writes how rasa, rakta, mamsa, meda, asthi, majja, sukra and ojas are all rooted in ahara.

"Pusyanti twahara - rasadrasa - rudhira - mamsa - medosthi-majja-sukraujamsi pancendriya-dravyani dhatu-prasada-samjnakani".58 Again, Caraka writes if there be an increase or decrease of bodily rasa, appropriate ahara to restore the balance of disturbed Rasas, might be prescribed (Sutra. 28.2). This is so because rasas being rooted in ahara, can be augmented or diminished by appropriate ahara. (Sutra. 28.2).

In Sutra-sthanam. 28.5, Caraka looks at sound, touch, vision, taste and smell as all different forms of ahara. These aharas when unsuitable or unpalatable, give rise to diseases as much as change of seasons, parinama or prajna-aparadha. The great importance of vibhava in the evolution of Rasa is to be looked at from this standpoint. Bharata writes,

13 (OP 179)

76

आहारैःधिष्ठिता: प्राणा: प्राणे योग्या: प्रतिष्ठिता: ॥

तस्माद्योग्यप्रसिध्यर्थमाहारे यत्नवान् भवेत्।

अयुक्तकायं प्रकान्तमतिवक्षुतपिपासितम् ॥

अतिपीतं तथा मुक्तं व्यायामं नैव कारयेत् । (59)

(G.O.S. V. 2. Ch. 10. 100b-102a)

Though Bharata is speaking of Carividhana, it is useful to remember that his use of the word “ahara” in the above context has almost universal validity, and applies to all forms of āhara. Bharata says in the strain of Caraka, āhare adhisthitha prana . . . This being so, just as the good physician carefully chooses proper diet, so also the good poet and the dramatist should be particularly careful about appropriate vibhavas. In Ch. 10, 97-100a, Bharata writes again,

सन्धाने शरविन्यासं विलेपो मोक्षणं भवेत्॥

तैलाम्यक्तो हि गात्रेण यवागूमुदितेन च ॥

व्यायामं कार्येदीमानं मित्तिवाकाशिके तथा ।

योग्यायां मात्रा मित्तिसताम्भादिति च 'समाश्रयेत् ॥

मित्ती प्रसारितान्तु व्यायामं कार्येननर्मन् ।

वलाथ' च निषेवेत नस्यं वस्तिविधि तथा ॥

स्निग्धान्यन्नानि च तथा रसर्कं पानकं तथा । (60)

The background of this passage from Bharata is to be sought in Caraka and Susruta. There is little difficulty about the presence of the concept of āhara in the kindred speculations of Bharata, and those of Caraka and Susruta. What is even more significant is this. Bharata takes over the details, regarding vyayama and their bearing on the question of purgation.

Four distinct stages are clearly marked out in Bharata’s analysis. These stages exactly correspond to their counterparts, in the treatment of the physical body in Caraka and Susruta. These stages in Bharata are (1) to get rubbed with oil (10.97) ; (2) after being rubbed with oil, to do some physical exercise in the gymnasium (10.98) ; (3) the third stage, is to be purged with snuffs or catheter (10.99). The last stage after being treated with snuffs and

cathetar, is taking in wholesome food (10. 100). All these stages can be traced in Caraka’s analysis of vata-vyadhi (Cikitsa-sthanam. Ch. 28). This again is highly significant, for ahara which lies at the root of Rasa, is essentially an activity of vayu, operating with hridayā.

Caraka in Siddhi-sthanam. Ch. 1. 17, speaks of the wholesome effects of ṣil in counteracting diseases of vayu.

न तैलाात् परमस्ति किंचित् द्रव्यं विशेषेण समीरनात् ।

स्ने हाद्रि रौक्ष्यं लघुतां गुरुत्त्वादौषणाच्च श्रोतं पवनस्य हत्वा ।

तैलं ददात्यशु मनः प्रसादं वीर्यं वलं वर्णमयाप्रुष्टम् ॥

There is nothing like oil in counteracting vayu. For oil being of a sneha nature, removes the ruksmata of the body ; being of a heavy and viscous nature, it removes the rapidity and lightness of vayu ; and being of a warm nature, it works against the coldness of vayu and quickly tranquilises the mind, and thus contributes to the development of strength and brightness, appetite and growth. In Sutra-sthanam. 5. 30-1, Caraka speaks again of how oil counteracts the unbalance produced by vayu.

न कर्णरोग वातोत्था न मन्याहनुसंग्रहः ।

नोच्चैः श्रुतिनन्वयधिग्यं स्यान्नित्यं कर्णातर्पणात् ॥

स्पर्शने चाधिको वायु: स्पर्शन्नात्मत्वगाश्रितम् ।

त्वयचैरच परमौषधं स्तम्भात् शीलयेन्तरः ॥

Bharata’s dependence on Ayurvedic speculations in his analysis of Cari-vidhana is so manifest, that even Abhinava-gupta is forced to admit that purgations and administration of oil are all from Ayurveda. Tāsya vasti-vidhischa taila-ghritadibhi yathadesakāla-prakrititi mantabyamayurvedat. (Abhinava-Bhāratī. v. 2. p. 116). Abhinava combines two separate processes together, which on a closer analysis belong to the two distinct stages.

After having been rubbed with oil, the young man does physical exercises. This second stage in Bharata’s analysis is a distinct echo of Caraka’s Sweda-adhyāya (Sutra-sthanam. ch. 14). Caraka notes how in almost all types of Sweda, the patient has first to be rubbed and treated with oil. This is

78

so in "prastarasweda" (Sutra. 14.17), in "nadi-sweda"

(Sutra. 14.18), "pariseka-sweda" (Sutra. 14.19), "abagaha-

sweda" (sutra. 14.20), "jentaka-sweda" (Sutra. 14.21),

"asma-sweda" ((Sutra. 14.22), "kuti-sweda" (Sutra. 14.24),

"bhu-sweda" (Sutra. 14.25, "kumbhi-sweda" (Sutra. 14.26),

"kupa-sweda" (Sutra. 14.27) and "holaka-sweda" (Sutra.

14.26), "kupa-sweda" (Sutra. 14.27) and "holaka-sweda"

(Sutra. 14.28).63 It appears that Bharata had a very intimate

knowledge of this treatment through sweda, practised in

Ayurveda. The sweda-treatment of which Bharata speaks

in Ch. 10, is niragni-sweda. It naturally follows that Bharata

should speak of vyayama as one of the recognised methods

for bringing about sweda. (Ch. 10, 98). It is highly inter-

esting to note that Caraka also speaks of Vyayama as one

of the tested niragni-sweda, widely used by the physicians

(Sutra-sthanam. 14.29). The predominance of Vayu in Sweda

has again to be discussed in Ch. VII, where it would be seen

that all Sattvika-bhavas are the result of Vayu-vikara.

The third stage in Bharata's analysis is one of the

most frequently used practices in Indian medicine. This is,

as Bharata says, balartham cha niseveta nasyam bastividhiṃ

tatha. (Ch. 10.99).64 Taking of snuffs and the use of purga-

tives are recognised modes for the treatment of vayu.

Caraka in Sutra-sthanam. 20. 11, writes से हस्वेदास्थापनान-

वासनस्तः कर्मयोगाभ्यंगोत्सादन परिषेकादिमिर्यातिहेतुर्मात्रां कालज्ञ

प्रमाणकृत्य | (65

Bharata seems to be writing out the prescription for the

treatment of a patient affected with wind, much as Caraka

does in the above passage. Nasya and Vasti are recognised

methods for the treatment of Vayu, and Bharata clearly takes

these over from the speculations of Ayurveda.

Bharata once again prescribes a drink of barley (jabagu)

for one, who is to be purgated. This fulfils Caraka's demand

that a purgated man must first take in a little warm water,

followed by a course of barley drink. Caraka in Sutra-

sthanam. 15, 15, writes, अथैनं सायाह्ने परे वाति सुष्टोदकपरिशिक्त'

पुराणानां लोहितशालितणडुलानां स्वकृत्तिक्रां मंडपूर्य सुष्टोषणां यवागूं पाययेदग्रि

वलमभिसमीक्ष्य चैवं द्वितीयेऽनुरूपे चान्नकाले। चतुर्थेऽन्तव्रणकाले तथाविधानामेव

शालितणडुलानामृतुसात्म्यैः..... भोजयेत् । दशमे त्वन्नकाले लावकपिंजल-

दीनामनुप्तमस्य मांसरसेनौदकलावणिकेनापि सारक्ता भोजयेत्। (66)

Caraka in the above passage also insists on taking well-boiled rice, along with the juice of mutton or other edible birds like lava or kapinjala. Bharata also prescribes exactly like Caraka that well-boiled rice is to be taken after a course of barley drink. Bharata writes in Ch. 10, 100,

स्रिग्धान्नान्त्राति च तथा रसकं मानकं तथा ।

आहाराधिष्ठिता: प्राणा: प्राणि योग्या: प्रतिष्ठिता: ॥ (67)

Abhinavagupta writes when commenting on this verse,

रसकमिति मांसरसं सेवन्तेति संग्रह: । पालकानि च स्रिग्धान्नोति संग्रह: ।

It appears that Abhinavagupta is aware of the implications of the concept of ahara in Bharata's speculations, and its background in Ayurveda.

There is nothing new in Bharata's discussion of vyayama, and food and drink, appropriate after a purgative treatment. Bharata follows even the little details, prescribed in the Ayurveda. Two relevant passages from Caraka might be cited ; and these would reveal the extent of Bharata's indebtedness to Indian medicine. Caraka speaks of the treatment of a patient, affected with wind.

केवलं निरुपष्टम्भादौ स्नेहैरुपाचरेत् ।

वायु' सपिवसातैलमज्जापानैर्नैरंरं तत: ॥

स्नेहक्रान्तं समाश्वास्य प्रयोभि: स्नेहयेत् पुन: ।

यूषैग्रैम्याम्बुजानूपरसैर्वा स्नेहसंयुतै: ॥

कृशाग्रपार्श्वै: साम्लवतै: सानुपानै: ।

नावणैस्तर्पणैश्वानै: सुस्निग्धं स्वेदयेत् तु तम् ॥ (68)

(Cikitsa-sthanam. 28.23)

Again,

दुर्बलो: यो विरेच्य: स्यात् तं निरुहैरुपाचरेत् ।

पाचनैर्दीपनौषैर्वा भोजनैस्तद्रयुन्नैरंरम् ॥

संयुदस्योध्यते चाग्रौ स्नेहक्षौदी पुनर्हितौ ॥

साद्र्म्ललवणस्रिग्धाहारै: सततं पुन: ।

नावणैर्धूपमानैश्च सर्वनिवोपपादयेत् ॥ (69)

(Cikitsa-sthanam 28.27)

80

Sweet and sour, salted and pleasant diet, along with snuff and smoking, are the best remedy for diseases of vayu. The emphasis on sweet dishes and mutton juices is typically Ayurvedic.

The great importance of vayu in Bharata’s analysis seems to have proceeded from the consideration that it is vayu, which makes for the contact of indriyartha with indriya. Caraka similarly holds in Sutra-sthanam. 1.26,

कालवृद्ध्येन्द्रियार्थानां योगो मिथ्या ना चाति च ।

द्रव्याश्रयाणां व्याधीनां त्रिविधो हेतुसंबको ॥ (70)

The three causes of both bodily and mental diseases, are kala, buddhi and indriya. These may arise out of ayoga, atiyoga or mithya yoga. These diseases might be either of body or of mind. Bharata also discusses ayoga, atiyoga and mithyayoga of indriya-indriyartha with reference to mind. He confines himself to the unbalance produced in the mind by these three yogas of indriya-indriyartha. The mind by these three yogas of indriya-indriyartha, is to be treated by the doctor and the medical practitioner.

In Sutra-sthanam, 15.16, Atreya says that ahara or food which restores the balance of bodily dhatus, and makes the unbalanced bodily dhatus return to normality, is of a beneficial nature. Ahara which even when properly administered disturbs the equilibrium of the body, and does not restore bodily balance, is ahita, or unsuitable. In Sutra-sthanam, 25.14, Atreya says once again that wholesome food contributes to the development of purusa, just as bad and unwholesome food is the cause of all diseases. Bharata in Ch. 22. 88-90 (G.O.S. vol. III) repeatedly says that indriyartha in the form of sabda, rupa, sparsa, gandha and rasa must be wholesome or ‘ista’, so that the mind might become “saumukha”. This is a distinct echo of Caraka’s emphasis on the necessity of having proper and wholesome food.

The philosophic standpoint in which the same thing when taken in through the different senses appears as different, binds together the speculations of Alamkara and Ayurveda. The same thing, when acting in different roles is known by different names. Caraka in Sutra-sthanam.

81

4.13. writes, एकोऽपि ह्यानेकां संज्ञां लभते कार्यान्तराणिकुवन्न् । तदूयथ

पुरुषो वहूनां कर्मणां करणो समर्यों भवति । स हदूयत् कर्म करोति तस्य तस्य कर्मणः कर्त्त 'करणकार्यसमप्रयुक्त' तदूद्रृ गौण नामविशेष प्राप्तोति ।...... (71)

The same thing assumes different - names, as it does different - works. Cakrapani explain : एक पुरुष; कर्मणां व्यापारणाम् उदन

पचनकुस्भकरणखननित्रकरणभूमिकाननानां करणो समर्थो भवति..... .... यदूयत् करमेंति पचनकुस्भकरनखननितकरणभूमिकादिग्रहः, यदूयत् कर्म करोति तस्य तस्य कर्मणः कर्त्त 'समप्रयुक्त' पाचक इति, करणसमप्रयुक्त' खानित्निक इति ..... ..... गुण्योगप्रवृत्त' गौण; गुण्योगरच-

पाचक इत्यत्र पचिक्रियायां कर्तृत्वं, खानित्निक इत्यत्र खाननं प्रति कर्तृत्वं, खनितकरणयुक्त खाननं प्रति

मिन्नोऽप्यमिधीयते व्यवहियते इति भावः ।

The same man might be a cook, a potter, a blacksmith, or a digger of ground ; their respective works are cooking, modelling of pots, fashioning of iron implements, or up-

turning the soil. The guna in the cook, is the knowledge of cooking, in the potter, the knowledge of clay-modelling, in the blacksmith the art of casting. Caraka in Sutra-sthanam, 26.26 describes how substance and quality always go together. A substance might sometimes become operative on account of its character as dravya, and at other moments, operative on account of its qualities. Caraka writes,

नतु केवलं गुरुप्रभावादेव द्रव्याणि कार्यं कुर्वन्ति स्युः। द्रव्याणि हि द्रव्यप्रभावाद्

गुण प्रभावाद् द्रव्यगुणप्रभावाच्च तस्मिस्तस्मिन् काले तत्त्वद्विधिकरणमासाद्य तां तांच

युक्तिमर्थश्च तं तमिप्रे त्य यत्कुर्वन्ति तत् कम् येनकुर्वन्ति तदूद्रव्यं...यत् साधयन्नि तत् फलम् । (72)

Caraka in Sutra-sthanam, 26.37, writes gunas can never subsist in gunas ; and so the physician means by rasa only a particular quality of the thing, charged with rasa. This mutual dependence of dravya and guna is brought out even more clearly in Sutra-sthanam. I.23, Caraka writes,

यत्राश्रिता: कर्मगुणा: कारणं समवायी यत्न ।

तदूद्रव्यं समवायी तु निश्चेष्ट: कारणं गुणः ॥ (73)

So substance and qualities can never be separated. All that takes place is this. Sometimes, substance predominates in

the effect produced ; sometimes it is the quality. But though

there may be relative predominance of one in a particular

state, there can never be a pure substance without any

quality, or pure quality without a substantial basis. This

impossibility of ever having pure substance or pure quality

was to colour the later speculations of Saiva, Pratyabhijna,

Sakta and Vaisnava systems.

It appears that the aswada of Sringara and Hasa is a

guna-pradhana aswada, while the aswada of Madhura and

Amla is a dravya-pradhana aswada. But substance and

quality always go together. There is more point in Bharata's

analogy of cooking in describing the evolution of Rasa

than what is apparent on the surface. First, the concept of

cooking, in so far as it means a change of state, is common

to Ayurveda and Alamkara. It is ahara in both cases. Now

the recipient sense-organ is the palate ; now it is the eye

and the ear9. In both cases, through the gratification of the

indriyas, the mind is pleased. What is important to remem-

ber in the present context is that Caraka's ahara is dravya-

pradhana, while Bharata's ahara is guna-pradhana. But

substance can never be without qualities. Inspite of this

relative predominance of dravya and guna in these two

forms of ahara, the citta-sattva is equally gratified by

both. This seems to be the philosophic background of how

sense-impressions in the form of vibhavas are being changed

into the bliss of aesthetic enjoyment.

VII

Once this philosophical position is accepted, it remains

to be seen how subjective as well as objective difference

make for divergent responses, even when the object or

the subject may remain the same. Sense-knowledge or ahara

is a relation between subject and object. A closer analysis

of this relation would reveal that cognition which is know-

ledge of vibhava, might differ with the difference of the

subject, when the object is the same ; or it might differ

with the difference of the object, when the subject is un-

9 Dr. Beare's "Greek Theories of Elementary Cognition from Alcmaeon to

Aristotle" (1906) may be profitably consulted.

changed. These subjective and objective differences account

for the very great differences between different responses,

which must finally decide the nature and quality of art-

experience.

It is easy to see how emotion, which is a subjective

reflection of an objective thing, is an ingredient of

consciousness. Stimulating situations give rise to wide-

spread ordered repercussions throughout the body, felt as

clearly marked colourings of consciousness. A detailed

analysis of these repercussions in the body and the mind

will be made in Chapters VII on sattvikabhava and VIII

on vyabhicharibhava. The patterns in organic response

assume the forms of fear, grief, joy and anger and other

emotional states. They arise for the most part when per-

manent or periodical tendencies of the individual are

suddenly either facilitated or frustrated. I. A. Richards

thinks that these responses are far less dependent upon

"the nature of the external stimulus than upon the general

internal circumstances of the individuals' life at the time

the stimulus occurs" (Principles of Literary Criticism,

1938, ch. XIII).

These emotional states, with pleasure and unpleasure,

are customarily distinguished under the head of feeling

from sensations, which are, as already noticed, very closely

dependent for their character upon their stimulus. Thus

sensations are ranked together as cognitive elements, con-

cerned, that is, with the knowledge of things, rather than

with the attitude or behaviour towards them, or our emo-

tion about them. Pleasure, however, and emotion have also

a cognitive aspect.

Two main features characterise every emotional

experience. One of these is a diffused reaction in the organs

of the body brought about through the sympathetic sys-

tems. The other is a tendency to action of some definite

kind or group of kinds. These extensive changes in the

visceral and vascular systems, characteristically in respira-

tion and in glandular secretion, commonly take place in

response to stimulus which call some instinctive tendency

into play. As a result of all these changes, a tide of sensa-

tions of internal bodily origin comes into consciousness. It

is generally agreed that these sensations make up at least

the main part of the peculiar consciousness of an emotion.

14 (OP 179)

84

These sensations or images of them are then a main ingredient of an emotional experience, and account for its peculiar “colour” or tone, for the voluminousness and massiveness, as well as for the extreme acuteness of emotions. But of equal importance are the changes in consciousness due to reactions in the nervous systems which control movement, governing muscular response to the stimulating situation.

I. A. Richards minimises the importance of the external stimulus, and emphasizes the general internal circumstances of the individual's life. The Indian analysis recognises the equal importance of both the external stimulus, and the general internal set-up of the individual's life. This last has played a very important part in Rasa-analysis ; it assumes the form of vasana. Rasa-enjoyment is impossible for one who is without vasana. The difference in external stimulus may give rise to the bheda of alambana or asraya. The difference in the subjective world may give rise to divergent appreciations of the same thing by different men, with subjective differences.

In the objective difference, it is the ahara or the thing appealing to sense, which changes. A man may love a host of things. There cannot be, it seems, any limit to what a man likes or dislikes. With a great lover like Rupert Brooke, it might be,

White plates and cups, clean gleaming,

Ringed with blue lines, and feathery, faery dust ;

Wet roofs beneath the lamp-light ; the strong crust

of friendly bread ; and many-tasting food ;

Rainbows, and the blue bitter smoke of wood.

(The Great Lover).

It is needless to refer to Kalidasa's ramyanì beekshya madhu-ransca nisamya, both of which are forms of ahara ; or to Keat’s sensuousness, where all five senses are gratified.

“The reason why a particular man may be in love with many things is that he has a soul which has many facets, eager to take in different kinds of experience. Keats spoke of this many-faceted soul of the poet, when he wrote, “The poet is the most unpoetic creature in the world” (Letter to Woodhouse. 27.10.1818.). The poet is unpoetic in the sense that he has not a fixed, circumscribed personality.

85

The appreciator of a work of art or of any form of sense-knowledge, looks forward to Sattvic, Rajas or Tamas ahara, as he is of a Sattvic, Rajas or Tamas nature. If the Sattvic purusa takes in Sattvic ahara, this ahara by first gratifying the senses, satisfies his citta-sattva. The Ayurveda speaks of satmya-ahara, or ahara which is congenial to body and soul. The body and the citta-sattva are equally gratified by this taking in of congenial Rasa. If on the other hand, one constantly feeds on uncongenial Rasa, there is a depletion, instead of gratification and replenishment. Caraka repeats this standpoint in Sutra-sthanam. I. 18, where he writes sarvada sarva-bhavanam samanyam vrddhi-karanam. Vacaspati Misra in Samkhya-tattva-kaumudi refers to the case of Padmavati in support of this standpoint, that how it is a particular man may love one object, while another may not be in love with it. This can only be explained if it be remembered that the mental constituents of these different men are also different. This subjective difference is explained if the varying mental constituents of these different men be taken into consideration. This applies to sattvic purusa, as also to Rajasa and Tamasa purusas. At the moment of the inception of the purusa, the balance and equilibrium of the three gunas is disturbed by adrsta, resulting in the evolution of very different purusas. This difference in the constituents of different purusas, is very difficult to be removed. For instance, it is almost an impossibility to make a man who is born deaf or blind, hear or see again. Such derangement in the nature of the purusa is made possible by the parents transmitting the latent cause, or his being born in such a place or time, which will predetermine his mental and physical constitution. Even social conditions might very largely influence the nature and destiny of man. There can hardly be any exception to such a general rule. A man is endowed with a particular prakriti by the inexorable law of causality at the moment of his birth, and also by his own adrsta. The whole range of activities of a man, his varied and diverse response, and the very nature of man—all these are preconditioned by his prakriti. This prakriti determines what sthayi-bhavas are dominant in a particular man. Prakriti as has been just noticed, is linked up with the laws of causality as well as his own adrsta. This varied and diverse response of a particular man, when he is confronted with different things,

is only to be explained from the analysis of the different

constituents of his mental make-up.

The problem of vibhava or āhāra might be looked at

from another standpoint. It is very often found that while

one particular object has a very wide range of appeal,

another object used by a different poet may have a very

limited range. How the wide popularity of one particular

vibhava, and the comparatively lukewarm appeal of another,

are to be explained ? It seems that the vibhava, which has

a very wide range of appeal, must have entered into mass-

consciousness. A good deal of obscurity of the literature

of a by-gone age, is to be explained by that there have been

a loss of continuity and a break of tradition. A poet cannot

successfully use new data for metaphor or simile until they

have become familiar to ordinary people. Many of the

abstract terms used by the poet today, have no overtones.

It is as if a painter suddenly stuck on his canvas a piece of

actual material, cabbage leaf, corduary, whatever it might

be, instead of painting it. The patch, the abstract word

snatched from contemporary life, has not been assimilated,

and fairly well digested in the popular imagination. Poetry

must have a common universal background between the

poet and the audience ; and this applies to all cases of aesthe-

tic appreciation. There is no common ground of belief today

upon which a poet may take his stand or against which he

may re-act, to correspond with the Christian tradition in

the Middle Ages, or the Renaissance humanist tradition of

the seventeenth century Europe, or the efflorescence which

characterises the ages of Kalidasa and Bhavabhuti. When

poets have no such common ground with their readers, no

set of beliefs, which both take for granted, some of the

traditional channels of communication are automatically

closed. This applies not only between two periods in one

particular country, but also between two particular countries

at one particular moment of time. A particular form, or

colour or shape is beautiful, if it has been endowed with

qualities which satisfy the ordinary man, and has entered

into mass consciousness. Why a particular form is beautiful

is to be explained with reference to social and cultural

conditions, to religious beliefs, and sometimes, even politi-

cal faith. All these enter into mass-consciousness.

In discussing vibhavas, it is good to remember that

poetry contains manifest and latent contents. The manifest

content can be roughly arrived at by paraphrasing the poem.

But the latent content, i.e., the emotional content has

almost entirely vanished in such a paraphrase. It was

contained then, not in the external reality (symbolised by

the words for this has been preserved), but by the words

themselves. The manifest content in the poetry is inter-

preted “rationally”. It is the external reality in the poem.

It can be expressed in other ways and other languages.

But the latent content of poetry is in that particular form

of wording, and in no other.

How is the latent content contained in the original

word and not contained in the sense of the words—i.e., in

the portions of external reality which the words symbolise ?

This external reality which is the vibhava of the poem, has

a manifest and latent content. This manifest content is

apparent even to a casual reader. But it requires a high

degree of intellectual and aesthetic discipline to get the

most of this latent content. Even then this content is not

completely exhausted. The emotions are associated affec-

tively with the portion of external reality, symbolised by

the manifest content, for another language can be made to

symbolise the same portion of external reality, and still it

is not the poem. How then did the original words in the

poem contain the emotional content “in themselves” and

not in the things they symbolised ? It is by the “affective

association” of ideas.

If a word be abstracted from its surroundings and

concentrated on, a number of associations will rise vague to

the mind. In a simple word like “spring”, there are

hundreds of them ; of greenness, of youth, of fountains, of

jumping ; every word drags behind it a vast bag and bag-

gage of emotional associations, picked up in the thousands

of different circumstances in which the word was used. It

is these associations that provided the latent content of

affect which is the poem. Not the ideas of “greenness” and

“youth”, but the affective cord linking the ideas of “green-

ness” and “youth” to the word “spring” constitutes the raw

material of poetry. Vibhavas which might assume any

shape in the world of sense, are all held by these associa-

tions and affective cords. It shows how deeply the vibhavas

must be immersed in the mass-consciousness, before there

can be any association and affectiveness.

This would indicate that a particular form is beautiful,

88

not so much for its intrinsic beauty, or even because of a

certain arrangement of the different parts of it, satisfying

our aesthetic sense, but because it fits in well with the social

and cultural ideals of the people and of the country. Dark

eyes are a mark of beauty among the Indians, while blue

eyes characterise beautiful women in the West. Dark hair

among the Indians, is beautiful, while golden auburn is the

characteristic mark of a beautiful lady in Europe. These

concepts go to the roots of the mass mind. It appears that

darkness which protects us from the glare of the tropical

sun, has been associated with the ideas of gentleness and

kindliness, while in Europe with its freezing skies, love

and affection are always warm.

These particular emotional attitudes are very often

associated with one particular word or with one particular

thing. It is usual to look at words and things as completely

divorced and severed from all such associations, and take

these at their face value. But take away the associations,

which are deeply rooted in the social consciousness of the

mass-mind, the colour and the glow of the word will all

disappear. A word is charged with an aura of meaning,

the sources of which are to be traced in the deep conscious-

ness of the country and of the people.

It is clear how one particular emotion, arising out of

a particular vibhava, may travel much beyond the imme-

diate significance of the words, or forms symbolising it.

There is another aspect of the problem. It is how one par-

ticular sentiment has to depend necessarily on certain

customary and usual excitants. The basis of this relation

appears again to be the law of association. In poetry, words

are born or re-born in the act of thinking. Does it follow

that poetry is solely an affair of words ? The answer seems

to be yes ; an affair of words adequate to the thought in-

volved. An affair of one word, like Shakespeare’s “incarna-

dine”, or of two or three words like “shady sadness”,

“incense-breathing Morn”, or of all the words necessary

for a thought like the Divine Comedy.

Vibhavás might again be looked upon either as

stationary or as evolving. Vibhavas which have no aura of

meaning about them, dull and prosaic as these are, are

stationary. It seems likely that most poetry with evolving

vibhavás, is markedly imaginative, and will naturally be

read as though its meanings were inherent in the words.

89

Some of the poetry with stationary vibhavas, will best be read otherwise—with a clear and recognised distinction between the words and the meanings attributed to them. But the finest poetry must necessarily use this evolving vibhava, where excitants are indissolubly connected with one particular sentiment. The stationary vibhava is the world of motor-buses, beef-steaks and acquaintances, the framework of things and events within which we maintain our every-day existence, the world of the routine satisfaction of our minimum exigencies. But in the world of evolving vibhavas, every word of the routine world is invested with other values than those necessary for our bare continuance as living beings : all objects for which we can feel love, awe, admiration ; any quality beyond the account of physics, chemistry and the physiology of sense-perception, nutrition, reproduction and locomotion.

It seems that while alambana vibhava is stationary, uddipana vibhavas are evolving, emergent. Alambana vibhava is the peg from which the superstructure of the artistic form is hung. The many associations and suggestions with which a particular form is invested, assume the form of uddipana vibhava. These uddipana vibhavas by their very nature, are associated with an object, which itself might be stationary. In this emergent evolution, the object will gather around it different symbols, which feed and sustain the original vibhava, so much so that certain ideas will come to be identified with it. For instance, the mention of Radha will bring in its train a host of uddipana vibhavas, like black clouds, black waters and dark forest trees. The basis of this relation is provided no doubt by Krisna and all these natural things, sharing in the concept of blackness. What is to be noted in the analysis of emergent vibhava is this. The colour blackness, the universal content in all these different manifestations, itself changes. Lord Krisna, black clouds, curling waters and dark trees are all vibrant with this one trait. Inspite of their very real difference, they have coalesced and merged into one in the mind of all lovers. But in stationary or alambana vibhava, the difference between the entities are uppermost, and cannot be ruled out. So alambana vibhava must first be made dynamic with the imposition of uddipana vibhava. It has already been noticed how important is this concept of movement in Bharata's Rasa-analysis, for vibhava which

90

is ahara must undergo a process of movement or paka,

before there can be the emergence of Rasa. This move-

ment or paka is a process of clarification and purification,

to which concept it will be necessary to return in Chapters

IV and V.

It has sometimes been questioned what is this bhava,

which arises out of an assimilation of vibhava. Is it a pro-

duct of individual culture, or does it proceed out of the

mass-mind ? The preferential assimilation of a particular

vibhava to the exclusion of the rest, may depend in the

first place on the kind of training, he received, the nature

of society in which he lived, the type of associates he comes

across in the daily rounds of life. The subject-object rela-

tionship, the knowing mind and the object known, cannot

be strictly split up into sharp divisions. It is in this sense

that nothing of which one is in any way conscious, is given

to the mind. That which is given to the mind is already

present in a latent form in him. Without this prior pre-

sence in the mind, cognition itself would become an im-

possibility. (See Chs. IV and V).

If the same object be presented to different spectators,

there will be very obviously the most diverse reactions. A

closer analysis will reveal that pleasure and pain are not

centred in the object or vibhava.

The enjoyer enjoys his

own delight. These objects or vibhavas only help the spec-

tator or the reader enjoy this delight, which is in him. The

object or vibhavas being only a help, pleasure and pain

ultimately depend on the instinctive capacity of the en-

joyer. Vacaspati Misra in Tattva-Kaumudi refers to the case

of Padmavati, where the same woman is the source of

pleasure, pain and stupor to the husband, disgruntled lover

and the lascivious man.

The peculiar mental constitution characterising dif-

ferent men, cannot be wilfully acquired, and is not the

result of education and culture. This is inextricably asso-

ciated with the whole life-history of the soul. It is pre-

natal, and is acquired automatically at birth. The diverse

world of vibhavas is brought to manas by pranavayu. The

movement of prana is intimately associated with the move-

ment of manas. The Kausitaki Upanishad writes, ja vai

prajna sa prana. Here by prajna is meant the manas. Prana

and manas are interdependent. The prana brings in mes-

sages to manas. Again, manas with its preferential likes and

dislikes disturbs the even flow of prana. The manas which is seated in the hrdaya, has for its instrument prana. The manas is subtle, while the prana operates on the physical plane. The physical manifestations in the vyabhichari-bhavas are to be explained from this standpoint (See Ch. VIII).

The ahara is gathered by manas through prana. The Brhad-aranyaka (2.1.192) speaks of a hita nadi or mano-vaha nadi, which brings in sensory impulses. When one is resting in one particular nadi, he becomes identified with it. The secret of pleasure lies in that one will have to rest in that particular passage of nadi. Happiness is only possible, if one seeks the help of sat-guru, sat-grantha, and sat-vakya. The continued stay in this hita or manovaha nadi gives rise to universalisation or tad-atmata. The problem of bhava may thus be looked at from two standpoints. It might be that bhava is the product of the cultural life of the people. A particular people are habituated to think in a particular way, largely conditioned by its social, religious and cultural life. This national outlook is thus being conditioned by many factors and elements. A man looks at a rose ; and what he thinks about it is the result of the thought of millions of men, who predeceased him. He is also influenced by the character of his mind, with which he had been born.

But it seems that the poet and the dramatist are not just playing with dolls and automatons, with predetermined mental dispositions. It has often been found that great poets and dramatists have also to create for them the fit audience. It is common knowledge how a great poet or dramatist moulds the taste of his audience ; he himself also changes a good deal on coming into contact with the audience, with whom he has to work. But in all cases, it is presupposed that the audience must have the germs of future development, latent in them. Without this vija, the array of vibhavas would be meaningless. Sakti or power of apprehension and growth is to be transmitted by one who has it to one who is without it. This transmission requires two, or three things. In the first place, there should be the transmitter, from where the sakti comes. In the second, there must be the receiving end, where the sakti is stored. (See Chapters IV and V). There is possibly the necessity of a third thing, which bridges the gulf between one who

15 (OP 179)

92

transmits and one who receives. This third requirement is fulfilled by the presence of a common cultural and social

background, a homogeneous platform on which the transmitter and the receiver may meet.

The stabilisation which arises out of bhava or ahara is of the nature of samprajnata samadhi. It should be noted

that the Yoga-sutra speaks of the four-fold divisions of samprajnata samadhi (Samadhi-pada 17). The intense absorption in one particular object, or motivation in one direction is

known as Yoga or Samadhi. When the citta becomes completely dissociated from everything else, or when the vrttis

are all controlled, it is once again Yoga or samadhi. In the initial stages of this second form of samadhi, there is awareness of the contemplated thing. Gradually, this awareness

goes out, leaving the citta without any vrtti or alambana. At this moment, the citta rests on its own self. From this

standpoint, it appears that samadhi is two-fold. In Samprajnata Samadhi, there is an awareness of the meditated

object or alambana. There is no kind of awareness whatsoever in a samprajnata samadhi.

Vacaspati Misra explains how the Yogin shall have to concentrate first on the tangible salagrama, or any imaginal

form of a god, or any other existent thing, and turn the stream of thought on it, just as the archer practises by

learning how to shoot first at a tangible form, and then at a less tangible form, and lastly, at a point. In all meditations, the stream of thought is turned away more and more

from real tangible forms and shapes to subtler and more refined forms. So it appears that the contemplated or meditated object may be of two forms : tangible or gross, and

intangible or subtle. Vacaspati writes, evam cittasyalambane suksmasuksmapanacatanammatra-

suksmabhogā sthulakaranabhutasuksmapancatanamatra-

lingalinga visaya vicara.74 It seems from the use of both

sthula and suksma, that everything in this world can be the objects of their contemplation. But still, there are points

of difference. There might be bahya-sthula and bahya-

suksma, as also adhyatmika-sthula and adhyatmika-suksma.

The bahya-sthula is again divisible into five constituents —

kshiti, apa, tejas, marut and vyoma. The indriyas are known

as adhyatmika-sthula. The constituents of bahya-sthula are

the tanmatra or paramanu ; these are known as bahya-suksma.

The constituents of adhyatmika sthula are aham-tattva, and

buddhi-tattva. These are known as adhyatmika suksma.

93

There are two other objects of contemplation apart from these ; these are atma and Iswara. There are different results if one turns one's stream of thought on these different objects of contemplation. If there be "abhoga" or prajna of bahya-sthula at the very beginning of samadhi, then it is known as "vitarka". If there be this prajna of bahya-suksma, then it is "vicara". If some "adhyatmika-sthula" be the object of samadhi, and there be prajna born out of dhyana, then it is known as 'ananda'. If there be this abhoga or prajna of the caitanya, endowed with buddhi, then it is known as "asmita". Samprajnata Yoga or Samadhi is thus divisible into these four parts, each successive stage showing a further refinement than the one which goes before. These are known as "sa-vitarka", "sa-vicara", "sa-ananda" and "sa-asmita".

There is a different type of samprajnata yoga ; it is concentration on God. Nothing remains to be done at such a moment. The worshipper is fully satisfied; and he is able to live through eternity. If one turns the stream of thought to. any of these four objects of contemplation, there is gradually an identification with the object of contemplation. The citta attains Sarupya with the object of contemplation, as contemplation gradually becomes steadfast. At such a moment, the contemplative self-absorbed citta is unmoved. No other vritti or jnana could be present in the mind. It is not only true for the present. If there be the tendency to manifestation of any of these, these cannot disturb the calm contemplativeness of vritti, which has reached the objectification of thought. When there is nothing to resist this steadfastness of citta, then it is samprajnata samadhi.

When there is intense apprehension of samprajnata samadhi, the citta becomes detached from the object of thought. At this moment, the citta easily attains a state which is without any alambana. Such niralambana samadhi is known as a samprajnata samadhi. There cannot be any mano-vritti at this stage. The citta in niralambana samadhi is like that of one who is fast asleep, or is on the brink of extinction, or laya. Such a stage is to be arrived at by long and continuous practice. This kind of niralambana samadhi is only to be achieved by severest penance and renunciation. The Yogi who is not satisfied with samprajnata samadhi, looks after asamprajnata samadhi. In asamprajnata samadh, there is universal discontent ; no vritti is allowed to stay in the citta. Even samprajnata vritti is ruled out. Such stead-

94

fastness naturally leads to such a condition, when the citta

comes to be without any support. The citta grows averse

to receiving any object. Gradually it gets to the limits of

laya.

In art-experience, the Samadhi is necessarily of the

samprajnata nature. The alambana is prominent in Rasa-

enjoyment. To rule out the alambana vibhava as in asam-

prajnata samadhi, would be to rule out the very basis of

Rasa-enjoyment. These vibhavas are gathered or ‘ahrita’

through the functioning of the different vrttis of the citta.

But in asamprajnata samadhi, the functioning of vrttis is

firmly checked. The artist aims to arrive at such a kind of

balance, through the mediation of alambana or objects of

contemplation. The nature of this balance is to be discussed

in fuller details in Ch. IX.

The problem of vibhava has been discussed at length,

because it is the starting point in Bharata’s Rasa-sutra. The

question has been looked at from the broader philosophical

standpoint. Narrow specialisation is very often likely to

ignore the philosophical affiliations of the problem. What is

Vibhava in Bharata is ahara in Caraka-Patanjala, and Aram-

mana in Abhidhamma system. It is expected that the whole

position of Indian Rasa-speculations, will have to be reassess-

ed when the question is looked at from this standpoint.

CHAPTER III

CONCEPT OF SAMANYA RASA IN

ALAMKARA AND AYURVEDA

The problem of the relation between body and mind has

occupied philosophers and scientists since the dawn of

thought, and to many it appears no nearer to solution now

than then. It has been named the central problem of all

philosophy, fundamental alike in the theory of knowledge,

in ethics and in religion. Not less fundamental, however, is

it for psychology and for physical science ; for the point of

view from which one regards mental development, the

changing forms of nature, human life and evolution, will be

radically different as one does, or does not attribute to mind

a controlling or directing part in the process of change and

growth. The question of the relation between body and

mind cannot be discussed apart from the question as to the

nature of the two factors, and the difference between them.

Both are really metaphysical questions ; that is to say, the

solution put forward will necessarily be incapable of scien-

tific verification.

A summary review of the positions taken by some

typical thinkers will serve to introduce the modern aspect of

the problem. The problem of the relation of body to mind

is of fundamental importance to a large group of sciences.

"Since the dawn of modern philosophy in the Meditations of

Descartes, the question of the relation between body and

mind has been continuously under discussion"*1. But the

problem dates back earlier still. It has deeply coloured the

aesthetic speculations of the ancient Greeks.*2

Whether one deals with the special relation between

the individual mind and the individual body, or with the

general relation of finite mind to matter, there are three

possible solutions for the problem : (1) That matter or body

is the "real" or "substantial" thing, while mind is its product,

1 Naturalism and Agnosticism, ii. 4—Ward

2 Jacob Bernays, the great Aristotelian scholar of the 19th century, offers a

pathological interpretation of the aesthetic doctrine of Katharsis in

Aristotle's Poetics. (vide Zwei Abhandlungen, Berlin. 1880). For a criticism

of Bernays' view, see Re-examination of the Doctrine of Katharsis—Sen

(Viswabharati Quarterly, 1959-60).

or in some way dependent upon it both for its existence and

for its qualities—the solution of Materialism. The materia-

list solution of the problem is faced with certain serious

objections. What is fatal to any such reduction of mind to

a secondary place is the first principle of Epistemology, viz.,

that matter or body is given only as idea or content of con-

sciousness ; it cannot be the source of that, which is a pre-

supposition of its own existence. It is an actual inversion

of the true order of things, therefore to place matter first and

mind second. The second difficulty the view has to face is

that of the incomparability of mind and matter : they contain

no common characteristic, except that of change in time : in

other respects, as the Cartesians*3 pointed out, every attri-

bute of mind may be derived of body, and vice versa. Thus

matter occupies space, has form, resistance etc., while mind

is wholly non-spatial in itself, has neither place nor any

other spatial determination. Any attempt to reduce mind

to matter, or to a mere effect of matter is self-contradictory.

(2) That mind alone is real, or substantial, and that matter

or body is its appearance, its manifestation, or in some

other way dependent upon it for existence and quality—

this is the solution of Idealism or Spiritualism.*4 (3) The

third standpoint recognises mind and matter as equally real

and independent entities ; or equally unreal, as the two

“aspects”, “appearances”, “sides” of one and the same

reality. The former is Dualism, the latter “Scientific

Monism”, or the Philosophy of Identity. There are of

course, many shades of difference and many overlappings

in the different views that have actually been held. The

relation between finite mind and finite body may be either

(a) that of complete dependence, as when the mind is

regarded as the “secretion of the brain”, or as an “epi-

phenomenon”, a by-product of physical process ; (b) that of

parallelism*5, the two series mental and bodily, correspond-

ing step for step, element for element with each other,

but never acting upon each other ; or (c) that of reciprocity

or inter-action, mental processes being the condition of

bodily, bodily of mental processes. The last is the “natural”

3

See Introduction p. iv-vi.

4

See Introduction. p. ii-iii. Jacob Boehme, among others, is the exponent of

this standpoint.

5

Among the exponents of Parallelism, Fechner, Spencer, Haeckel, Hoffding

and Paulsen may named.

standpoint. We regard ourselves as causing bodily move-

ments by our will, and as receiving sensations and percep-

tions from physical objects which act upon our bodily

organs. It is also the standpoint of Dualism on the one hand,

and of several forms of spiritualism or Idealism on the

other.

The Indian approach to the problem of the relation

between body and mind is more philosophically conceived

than the solution, offered by the Materialists, or by those

advocating Parallelism. The solution offered by the Ideal-

ists or the Spiritualists, again, does not give a complete

answer to the question. Before discussing the two sister

speculations of Alamkara and Ayurveda, which run parallel

(the word is used with some diffidence, for it is much more

than a case of parallelism) to each other, it is necessary to

analyse the common basis, which holds these two specula-

tions together.

The discussion of how sarira and manasa Rasas are

equally dependent on āhara in Ch. II, should have pointed

out that there must be a logical starting point, a universal

basis of these two sister speculations in Alamkara and

Ayurveda. It is easily conceivable that there cannot be any

similarity between two entirely disparate things. The fact

that there is a good deal of similarity between these two

kindred speculations points out that there is something

common in between these two. In Ch. II, it has already

been noticed that the Rasa speculations of Alamkara and

Ayurveda, being both based on āhara, necessarily run paral-

lel to each other. It is necessary to examine the universality

or samanyatā of these two concepts, if any serious attempt

is to be made for a proper understanding of the dependence

of one speculation on the other. An analysis of this

samanyatā of sarira and manasa Rasas should indicate that

the large scale borrowings by Alamkara from Ayurveda

were no freak, but were made necessary and even impera-

tive by the inwardness of the problem. This analysis of

the unifying basis of these two kindred speculations has not

been attempted by any one, writing on the history of Rasa

literature.

A thing which is being always interpenetrated by a

particular constituent or a thing which could never be with-

out thus being penetrated by such a constituent, is known

as the vastu, made up of this upadana. The teachers of

98

Samkhya, Patanjala, and the Vaiakarans, Kalakaranikas and the Brahma-vadins are all agreed about the validity of

this position. The Samkhya system puts forth the arguments

for the validity of this proposition. The Samkhya teachers

refer among many others to the hetu, “Samanvayat” for the

establishment of the existence of Prakriti. Vacaspati Misra

in Bhamati, offers an explanation of this hetu, on which

depends the logical basis of this doctrine, Samanvayat.

“Jani ca jena rupena a ca sthaulyat a ca sauksmayat

samanyiyante tani tadatmaka-samanya-purvakani loke drstani.

Jatha mrdatmaka-samanyataya samanvita ghatadayo

vikara mrt-samanyopadanoka loke prasiddha. Vacaspati

means by this that all karya-vastu in a substantial or in a

refined form, or in any other form is always being pene-

trated by something underlying them. This is their samanya-

rupa. A thing being inseparable from this universal content,

is thus known to be the product of this constituent. A thing

becomes absolutely unintelligible, when it is without this

substantial nature or basis. This universal content which

always underlies all manifestations is known as the upadana

of this vastu. The universal content of all particular mani-

festations, without which content a thing can never be, is

its constituent. There can never be an upadeya without this

upadana, or a thing without this constitutive basis. It is

because of this that the Samkhya looks upon that some-

thing which underlies all different manifestations, and

can be traced in all such expressions, as the universal

content or upadana of it. The Samkhya looks at samanya

as upadana, and visesa as upadeya. Pots and jars are

the particular manifestations of the universal earth.

So these particular manifestations as pots and jars are

Karya, but the universalised nature of earth which under-

lies all these particular manifestations, is their upadana.

This universalised nature of earth underlies all such parti-

cular manifestations. There can never be a particular form,

completely divorced from this substantial basis.

What is the nature of this universalised earth which

underlies all particular manifestations as earthen pots and

jars ? The Samkhya doctrine believes in Sat-karya-vada. It

holds that asat can never come into being, just as sat can

never pass away. So according to this view, appearance and

disappearance of particular forms out of this unmanifest

state, are to be taken as creation and destruction. All

99

possible particular manifestations of earth are comprehended in this universalised nature of earth. The Samkhya doctrine speaks of karya as dharma, and upadana or constituent as dharmin. So it appears that the universalised nature of earth is dharmin, while pots and sherds are particular manifestations, and as such, dharma. All these dharmas, and these are of a diverse and varied nature, are stationed in this generalised concept of earth. All such dharmas can be classified into three groups. These are known as santa, udita and avyapadesya. All dharmas of a particular body are to be traced to any of these three forms. When the lump of earth is in "pinda" form, then this state is called the manifest or udita form of pinda. When the pinda is in the manifest state, then the pot is in an avyapadesya form, lying concealed in the pinda nature of earth. But when with the passing away of the pinda stage, there is the manifestation of the pot, it is usual to speak of the pinda-stage as santa, and of the ghata-stage as udita. Again, with the passing away of ghata, there is the appearance of the pot-sherds. At such a moment, it is usual to speak of the ghata-stage as santa, and pot-sherds as udita. These pot-sherds were present in an unmanifest or avyapadesya form in the ghata. So all future states are known as avyapadesya, the present stage is known as udita ; and all past forms are characterised as santa. All particular manifestations will be comprehended in one of these three states ; but the universalised nature of earth underlies them all. It has already been pointed out how dharma can never be without this dharmin. The Santa stage is sometimes spoken of as astamita, or past and no longer existent. A vastu disappears into that from which it springs. So to speak of the universalised nature of earth would be to speak of a state of earth, where all particular manifestations of it, have already set and disappeared. When all these diverse manifestations have entered into that one state, which can comprehend all, then it is usual to speak of that state as the universalised nature of it. This universal content in all these diverse manifestations of earth, is known as the samanya earth. This universal content of earth is the constituent of all such particular manifestations. The universal content of earth, underlying all particular manifestations is thus known as upadana. The Samkhya looks upon samanya as upadana or constituent ; and visesa as upadeya or manifest;

16 (OP 179)

100

fest product. Though universalised earth underlies all

particular manifestations as jar and pot, it does not under-

lie particular manifestations of water or of fire. The

constituents of particular manifestations of water or of fire

are the universalised nature of water or of fire.

The question naturally arises if there is really some-

thing, which can be called the universal content of earth.

A thing which can become an object of knowledge, is said

to have an existential nature. The existence of a thing

which cannot become the object of knowledge, can neither

be affirmed nor denied. Nothing can be said about some-

thing, which totally eludes all means of knowledge. The

earth which is visible, is always impressed with particular

shapes and forms. The earth which is without any impres-

sion whatsoever, cannot be the subject of pratīti or know-

ledge. But the universal nature of earth which can never

be the subject of knowledge, is hardly comprehensible. So

it seems fair to say that if the universal nature of earth,

which is without the impressions of particular manifesta-

tions, cannot be the subject of knowledge, then there is no

such thing as universalised earth, completely divorced

from these particular manifestations. But if the validity of

the proposition of the universalised nature of earth be not

established, then the very basis of Samkhya system would

be uprooted. The validity of Prakriti in Samkhya specu-

lations rests on the establishment of this samanya or uni-

versalised concept of things. If on the other hand, the

Samanya concept could not be established the validity of

Prakriti itself would be questioned. This means that there

is an end to all processes in Samkhya evolution and in-

volution. The Patanjala Yogasutra (3.14) speaks of santa-

udita-avyapadesya-dharmānupati-dharmi.75 There can never

be, according to this sutra, two udita states (dharma)

in one common substrate (dharmi). If there be

one udita state in a particular substrate, then the other

states or dharma must either be of a santa or of an

avyapadesya nature. So if the earth has assumed the form

of a pot, there must be before it earth in the form of

"pinda". If the pinda form be in the udita state, then the

pot cannot appear or become udita in it. One udita or

manifest state is always at war with another udita state. So

if the pinda state becomes santa, then the ghata-state

becomes udita. It is not possible to say that an udita state

101

becomes santa even before the appearance of another con-flicting udita state. To say that this is possible would be

saying that two opposing stages can exist together in the

same common substrate. But two opposing udita stages can

not exist simultaneously in this upadana or substrate. The

logic of the argument naturally leads to the conclusion

that the pinda-state must cease to be, before the advent of

the ghata-state. At the moment of the disappearance of the

pinda-state, no other udita state is conceivable in the earth.

If such a second state be said to exist in the earth, then the

argument is vitiated by the above fallacy. The earth also

is charged with opposite states ; and there cannot be the

appearance of the ghata-state). The logic of the argument

demands that after the disappearance of the pinda-state and

before the advent of the ghata-state, there is a moment when

the earth has got to be without any quality whatsoever. This

formless state of the earth is known as the universalised

content of it, or the mrit-samanya. This is the constituent of

all particular manifestations of earth, as jars and pots.

No particular manifestation of earth can be the consti-

tuent of any other particular manifestation ; because parti-

culars are always opposed to one another. So it naturally

follows that the samanya is the constituent of visesa. The

samanya-state is in accord with all particular manifestations

or visesas. The samanya-state underlies all particular mani-

festations, and as such, is in keeping with different manifes-

tations or visesas. The universal mrit, which is without any

impression is thus the constituent of all different forms of

mrit, in the shapes of jars and pots. To say that the universal

mrit exists is to say this much that there is no jar and pot in

it. But still there are in this universal mrit, rupa, sparsa and

gandha. Even when rupa, rasa, sparsa and gandha exist in

the earth, these are without any particular form or shape, so

much so that the earth itself has almost disappeared. The

degree of subsidence of particular forms in the universal

basis of mrit, has been carried so far, and the earth itself

has become so refined as to be almost on the verge of

extinction, that the Buddhist philosophers have been led to

believe that there cannot be such a stage, when the earth

itself is without any form whatsoever. So after the dis-

appearance of the pinda-stage, and before the advent of the

ghata-stage, there is no earth at all. So jars and pots spring

out of nothingness or abhava. The Buddhists hold that all

102

existent things thus come into being out of nothingness. But

the Samkhya teachers hold that existent things can never

come into being out of nothingness : nasatovidyate bhava,

nabhavo vidyate sata (Bhagavad-Gita. II. 16). All existent

things and visesas on the other hand, come out of samanya.

The proof that samanya is the constituent of visesa, is to be

found only in direct intuitional knowledge. The earth which

is in the form of pinda, is the same which persists and enters

into the making of ghata. Every one has a kind of intuitive

apprehension that this earth is the same—saivaeam mrit.

The earth which appears in this intuitive apprehension

(pratyabhijnamana) is the universalised general concept of

mrit, or mrit samanya. It should be noted that no particular

state or vises avastha can ever become the subject of

intuitive apprehension. This generalised concept of earth is

implicit in all particular manifestations of it. Though it is

possible to apprehend the circumscribed nature of earth in a

visesa form, the uncircumscribed character of samanya earth

is beyond the reach of all apprehensions. The generalised

character of samanya earth is far more extensive and wide-

ranging than a visesa or particular manifestation of it. With

the establishment of this extensive character of mrit-samanya,

one is logically led to its incomprehensibility. The existent

thing or upadeya in Samkhya analysis is thus of a more

circumscribed character than the upadana. This upadana is

more extensive and far more subtle than the upadeya. The

general rule govering the relationship between upadana and

upadeya is this. The upadeya or the product is always more

limited and circumscribed, and of a smaller extension than

its constituent or upadeya. If the analysis be pressed fur-

ther, it will appear that even mrit-samanya or the general-

ised character of earth is the upadeya or the product of the

constituent of gandha-tanmatra. This gandha tanmatra is

far more extensive and wide-ranging, and as such, more

subtle and incomprehensible than mrit-samanya. So also

gandha-tanmatra becomes the upadeya or the product, its

constituent or upadana being bhutadi ahamkara or tamasa

ahamkara. So also tamasa ahamkara is the upadeya, its

upadana being avyakta or pradhana. This logical sequence

from upadeya to upadana would reveal that upadana is

infinitely more extensive and subtle than upadeya, and is

closer to the samanya concept. This expansion and exten-

sion, this width of range and universalised character of

appearance, along with subtlety of comprehension have reached their acme at a particular stage.

This is the primary beginning of all creations. This is samanya par excellence. This is so subtle as to be beyond all comprehensions. This width of range and expansion and extension, this samanya character of the thing become more and more comprehensive, as one travels from one upadana to another. The state beyond which there can be no further stage, the extension which does not admit of further extension, the samanya character beyond which there is none, and incomprehensibility which has reached its limits, all these have ultimately come to rest at a particular point. This resting-point according to the logic of Samkhya analysis, is in Prakriti, the universal constituent of everything else. This Prakriti is by far the most extensive ; this underlies everything else. This is the mrit-samanya; this is the ref inest of them all. This is the stage where the breaking up of upadeya into upadana must necessarily stop. But according to the Vaicesika analysis, upadana is more limited in extension than the upadeya. The Vaicesika analysis holds that as one travels from one upadana to another, one arrives at the minutest fragment, the atomic nature of things. The analysis in Vaicesika system must stop with the smallest, the minutest, the atomic-character of the constituent. So the Samkhya and Vaicesika analyses travel in two opposite directions. The Samkhya holds that the universal constituent of everything is all-embracing prakriti ; it is the most comprehensive. But according to the Vaicesikas, the constituents which enter into the making of everything, are the atoms, the smallest and the most subtle of all. There are further points of distinction. The Samkhya holds that the upadana is more subtle and less comprehensible, which the Vaicesikas deny. The Vaicesikas are of opinion that upadana and upadeya sharing in the same characters and qualities, are equally manifest, equally visible. The invisibility of paramanu and dvanuka is to be accounted for by their extremely small dimensions. But these have in them all the qualities, present in the manifest form. So the earth-atoms have all the qualities, which are to be met in the earth ; so it is the case with water-atoms and water. In this way, the Vaicesika system is just the opposite of the Samkhya scheme. The rigour of logic in Samkhya system points to universal prakriti. This last is to be arrived

104

at as one travels from one upadana to another. But in

Vaicesika scheme, the resting place is in the atom itself.

Though there is this clear distinction between Samkhya and

Vaicesika analyses, it has escaped the attention of some

writers on Samkhya system. Vijnana-bhikshu has tried to

identify the two very distinct standpoints of Samkhya and

Vaicesika, and sung paens of praise of Samkhya analysis,

even when he has been discussing Vaicesika system.

It has already been noted that the upadana of mrit-

samanya is gandha-tanmatra. The five tan-matras are the

upadana of the five mahabhootas. The question of gandha-

tanmatra might be discussed at length. The Yukti-dipika in

explaining the thirty-eight Karika (p. 140) writes :-

Katham punastanmatra-nityyuchyate. Tulya-jatiya-visesan-

upapattes, evam sparsa-tanmatre-mrdu-kathinadayo. Evam

rupa-tamatre sukla-krisnadayo, evam rasa-tanmatre

madhura-mladayo, evam gandha-tanmatre surabhyadayo.

Tasmat tasya tasya gunasya samanyam evatra na visesa iti

tanmatrasvete avisesa.76 The Yukti-dipika says that tan-

matra arises out of non-cognition (anupapatti) of visesas of

a similar nature. In gandha-matra, there is the universal

character of gandhattva. But at the moment of taking in a

particular gandha, it is usual to take in with it, also its

fragrance or the lack of it, and all different degrees of

gentle, pungent and refreshing qualities associated with it.

So the different degrees of fragrance are all rooted in the

universal nature of gandhattva. It has already been noted

that samanya is the constituent, while visesa is the product

of it. When all different manifestations or characters of

gandha are latent in the generalised nature of gandha, then

this universal state comprehending all different states of

gandha, is gandha-tanmatra. There is here nothing but

gandhattva. The generalised nature of gandha, in which all

different manifestations of gandha have disappeared, cannot

be the subject of sensuous cognition. It being extremely

refined, cannot be the subject of sensuous apprehension. It

is usual to take in gandha, charged with a particular

character or form. The incapacity of ordinary human senses,

stands in the way of apprehending the universal nature of

gandha. This applies also to the inability of appreciating

the tanmatras of other indriyarthas. At the moment of

appreciating a visual form, the form is always invested with

red and blue and yellow colours. The form is apprehended

as a red or a blue form. But take away these colours, there

cannot be any cognition of visual form as such. The colours,

red and blue are visesas. But the visual form which

underlies all these different manifestations is rupa samanya.

So Rupa-tanmatra would mean Rupa-samanya, in which have

disappeared all different manifestations or visesas of visual-

ity. This tanmatra is so subtle and refined that it is always

eluding human apprehension. It is accessible only to the

Yogins and the gods. In the Bhamati it is said that the conch

is shrouded with whiteness and appears as such to sight on

account of dosas. If the whiteness arising out of error be

not apprehended, then how can the absolutely unqualified

conch be the subject of visual impression ? If the conch does

not appear before the sight, then how is the impression

of yellow in the conch to be explained ? The rupas or

affective qualities of the object under discussion are not

apprehended, and yet the object has to be cognised. This

is an anomalous position and cannot be true. The Tatparya-

parisuddhi-prakasa tries to meet this objection. There might

not be the cognition of the genus whiteness on the conch,

because of error or dosa. But nevertheless, there is cogni-

tion of a species of whiteness. So a species of whiteness

divorced from the genus whiteness flashes forth as visual

image. The conch shell itself would have been invisible, if

these species of whiteness had not been there. In the visual

cognition of a particular form, there are certain rules,

governing the relationship between matter and qualities.

Further, the statement that it is a yellow conch-shell applies

only to the colour yellow. But there must be beforehand, an

appearance of the colour itself, without which the conch

would not have appeared at all. The argument is put for-

ward that there is no binding rule that in the visual cogni-

tion of a particular object, there should be cognition of its

rupa as well. But how can an object be apprehended with-

out its rupa being simultaneously cognised ? The answer

has been suggested that though there be non-cognition of

rupa of the object, the appropriate white colour being

inherent in the object (vastu-gatya), the object is cognised

after all. So if there be cognition of particular manifesta-

tions of whiteness without an apprehension of whiteness

itself, then there is an absolute disparity between two

white things, without a generalised basis of whiteness. This

cannot be taken to mean as tan-matra, which enters into all

different manifestations of it. The Nyaya also does not

recognise that with the non-cognition of the generalised character of rupa, there is cognition of particular manifestations of it. To say so would be to admit tacitly that there is cognition of rupa-tanmatra. But rupa as such, divorced from these particular manifestations, cannot be the subject of the knowledge of sense.

All particular manifestations are rooted in a samanya basis. This universal nature of things manifests itself in these different particular forms. The samanya is the upadana or constituent of all particular manifestations. It is not possible for any one to take in all these different manifestations at the same time. So the pleasure arising out of the taking-in of these different manifestations is comprehended in the pleasure arising out of the enjoyment of samanya. The pleasure of samanya is exceedingly great and far surpasses the pleasure arising out of visesas. This pleasure of visesas is necessarily limited, circumscribed. But the purusa who enjoys samanya is a contented soul. The man who enjoys visesas, is always dissatisfied.

It is useful to remember here that according to the Vaicesika system, gandha-tanmatra, rupa-tanmatra are not gunas. The Vaicesika philosophers, speak of gandha, rupa and rasa as gunas ; and they are essentially different from their substantial basis, dravya. But in the Samkhya analysis, the gunas and the guni, or guna and dravya are not essentially different. If these had been completely different, then the relation of guna and guni would not have subsisted at all. So a relation of the nature of bheda-abheda between guna and gunin has to be recognised. This bheda-abheda relationship goes by the name of tadatmy a. The object and the qualities are similar in certain respects ; in other respects, they are very different. The Vaicesikas recognise this tadatmya relationship with very great emphasis on absolute differentiation. But this is not proper, because recognition of relationship is at the root of all associative ideas.

There cannot be any relationship with one's own self. So there cannot be any recognition of relationship (sammandha-pratiti) with one's own. What the Samkhya means by tadatmy a or bheda-abheda-sammandha is nothing but bheda of qualities, and abheda as dravya or adhikarana, -bheda- samanidhikarana abheda. In other words, the bheda-abheda relationship subsists between objects which are both similar and dissimilar in nature.

The Samkhya-Patanjala philosophy supports this bheda-

abheda relationship. The Patanjala Bhasya discusses this

relationship at length ; but Iswarakrisna's Samkhya-karika is

completely silent on it. This relationship has again been

worked out at length in the commentary of Bhagavad

Bhaskari. Bhagavad Bhaskari believes in creation as the

evolution of Brahma. Evolution or parinama is by nature

dependent on bheda-abheda. The Samkhya-Patanjala system

also believes in evolution or parinama. This explains the

bheda-abheda character of their philosophy. Beauty and

beautiful form, smell and the sweet-smelling thing, are at

once the same and different. There are bheda and abheda

between beauty and the thing in which beauty subsists. This

relationship which is at once the same and different, is

known as bheda-abheda or tadatmya. So there is tadatmya

relationship between beauty and beautiful form, between

smell and the smelling thing. The Vaicesika philosophers

are surprised when it is stated that gandha-tanmatra is the

constituent of earth, or rupa-tanmatra is the constituent of

tejas. Gandha and rupa are qualities, while earth and fire

are substances. Qualities cannot be constituent or upadana

of substances. Dravyas can only be the upadana of other

dravyas. This standpoint of Vaicesika philosophy is of

little significance. The Samkhya system on the other hand

does not recognise a complete separation between beauty

and beautiful form, or smell and the smelling thing. When

the Samkhya speaks of gandha-samanya or rupa-samanya,

or in other words, gandha-tanmatra or rupa-tanmatra, it

does not mean thereby merely a quality, completely divorced

from substance. Dravya is always characterised by

gunas : yatra-srita karmaguna karanam samabhee yat

{Caraka—Sutra-sthanam, I. 23).77 The question arises if

the earth springs out of only gandha-tanmatra, then there

could be no cognition of rupa, rasa or sparsa in it. So if

tejas springs out of only rupa-tanmatra, there could be no

cognition or sensation of touch in it. The Samkhya process

of evolution means that at the moment of the creation of

akasa, there is only sabda-tanmatra. Vayu arises out of the

mixing of sabda-tanmatra with sparsa-tanmatra. When

rupa-tanmatra mixes with these two tanmatras, there is the

emergence of tejas. These three tanmatras along with rasa-

tanmatra are at the root of the emergence of apa. This

compound of sabda-sparsa-rupa-rasa tanmatras by getting

mixed with gandha-tanmatra, makes for the creation of

prithvi. Out of one tanmatra springs akasa : out of two

17 (OP 179)

emerges vayu, out of three, tejas, and apa springs out of four tanmatras, and earth out of five. The akasa is the most refined and subtle ; vayu comes next in the scale ; tejas is grosser, apa is even more gross, and earth is the most ponderous of them all. These differences in constituents also explain the different degrees of receptivity of them by different senses.

A particular point should be emphasized. Among all the different contributing causes in the working of parinama, only one becomes upadana karana. 'The rest will be all nimitta karanas. The causes are divisible, according to Samkhya analysis, into upadana and nimitta. Though the earth springs out of five elements or tanmatra, its constituent is gandha-tanmatra. The four other tan-matras are nimitta-karana. So also though water springs out of four tan-matras, its constituent or upadana happens to be rasa-tanmatra, the rest being all nimitta-karanas. So it is the case with teja, whose upadana karana is rupa-tanmatra, the rest being all nimitta-karana.

As one travels from constituent to constituent in Samkhya analysis, the basis is broadened and becomes more and more comprehensive, until the finality is reached in prakriti. The Samkhya speaks of this prakriti as viswa-rupa. This prakriti can assume any shape or form. The range of activities of the prakriti is beyond all comprehensions. This manifold world with all its diversity has sprung from one cause. This is the acme of philosophic thought. This is the height of speculative analysis. The Samkhya teachers are called Brahma-vadi, because they believe in this universalised nature of Prakriti. Just as mrit-samanya is infinitely more subtle and refined than earthen jars and pots, so also gandha-tanmatra is far more subtle and refined than mrit-samanya. The constituent of gandha-tanmatra, aham-kara or buddhi-tattva is again far more subtle and unmanifest than the product of which it is the constituent. Prakriti is the culmination or the end-point in which comprehension, subtlety and refinement have reached their fruition. All jada-varga is thus resolvable in Samkhya-analysis in this extremely subtle, all comprehensive Prakriti.

'The relation of karya-karana in Samkhya system subsists only in jada-varga. The purusa is untouched by any karya or karana. In the analysis of the evolution of panca-mahabhuta from the tan-matra, it has been noticed that one tan-matra is the constituent or upadana of one mahabhuta,

while the remaining tan-matras are the nimitta-karanas. The

characters of the upadana karana are usually manifest in the

upadeya karya. This explains how the characters of the

nimitta karana, the tan-matras are also recognisable in the

panca-mahabhoota. This material universe is penetrated by

the three qualities, priti, apriti and visada. These three

qualities are sattva, rajas and tamas. The unbalance of

these three qualities makes for creation ; the achievement

of balance leads to destruction or laya. The dominant guna

in one particular karya becomes the upadana, while the sub-

ordinate ones are the nimitta karanas of the karya. In a

Sattvic activity or karya, the Sattva guna becomes the

upadana karana, and is dominant in it. The Rajas and

Tamas gunas are present in an anga or subordinated form.

The Samkhya looks at everything as being penetrated by

these three gunas. The balance or unbalance are achieved

because of the samaparinama or the visamaparinama of the

gunas themselves. The Vyasa-bhasya of Patanjali divides the

visible world into bhuta and indriya (II. 18). The bhutas are

grahya ; the indriyas are grahaka. These grahaka indriyas

come out of ahamkara or buddhitattva. But grahya-grahaka

objects proceed out of external objects. It seems that they

cannot proceed out of ahamkara. The Nyaya speaks of the

indriyas as "Bhautika". Eyes come out of tejas ; ears out

of akasa, the jnanendriyas out of prithvi, the taste organs

out of water, and the sensation of touch out of vayu. But

according to Samkhya analysis, the indriya-varga proceeds

out of ahamkara. To say this is to say something which is

self-contradictory. It is understandable that the senses or

indriyas are made up of bhutas. But it is difficult to

imagine how they can be ahamkarikas. It is necessary to

analyse the concept of ahamkara for a proper understanding

of this anomalous position.

The Samkhya-karika says, abhimano-ahamkara. By

abhimana is meant the sense of self-hood or aham abhimana.

The ahamkara manifests itself in such particular vrittis as

"I am", "I go". The sense of self, "I" is at the root of the

concept of ahamkara. There cannot be such a sense as "I

am" unless ahamkara is penetrated by abhimana vritti. The

first sensation after the awakening of purusa from susupti

is this aham abhimana. This sense of "I" is because of this

ahamkara. Unless there is this feeling of "I", there cannot

be such sensations as "my body", "my senses". The sense

of "I" must precede the sense of "my" or "mine". This

110

sense of myself or this possessive instinct is always referring to ahamkara. There cannot be any cognition or sphurana of an indriya or indriyartha without this relation between ahamkara and senses having been first established. The sense of “I” or aham flashes forth ; and along with it, there is the flashing of indriya and visaya. There is no flashing of eye as such, or of ear as such. But the flashing is always of mine eyes, mine ears, when the relation of the senses with ahamkara has already been established. This possessive instinct first penetrates the indriyas ; and the indriyas flash forth with this ahamkara. It has already been noticed that the constituent of a particular thing is its samanya-rupa. It has also been seen how the visesas become apprehensible, only when they are penetrated by samanya-rupa. The indriyas are penetrated by ahamkara, and the indriya-vargas cannot become sphurad-rupa without the prior association with ahamkara. The natural corollary is that the constituent of indriyas is this ahamkara. A man freshly awakened from sleep, first has a sense of “I”, there can be a sphurana of indriyas as “mine” only after this. Take away the sense of “I” ; there is no longer any sphurana of indriyas. The sphurana of indriyas being always penetrated by ahamkara, it is possible to imagine ahamkara to be the constituent of indriyas. So also, the visayas or the objects flash forth, when these are penetrated with ahamkara. When an object flashes forth, then there is not this feeling that it is the object alone which is flashing. There is on the other hand the feeling that the object flashes to me, the object is seen by me, the object is being felt by me. In this way, all objects become vibrant or apprehensible when these are penetrated with ahamkara. So the samanya-rupa of all objects is again this ahamkara. The Mathore-vritti and the Tattva-samasa-sutra-vritti write, “rupe aham, rase aham, gandhe aham”. So the Tattva-samasa (p. 240) writes, “aham sparse, aham rupe, aham rase, aham gandhe, aham swami dhanavan, ahameeswara”.78 This aham vritti of ahamkara which is known as abhimana, is almost on the verge of extinction when one is fast asleep or susupta. So the senses and objects of sense are of no consequence to a man who is thus fast asleep. At the beginning of awakening of the susupta purusa, this aham vritti of ahamkara, known as abhimana, makes its appearance. Then there is a flashing of the senses and the objects of sense. The Samkhya Karika (Karika. 24) writes, “abhimanohamkara stasmadviveka pravartate sarga”76

111

One tanmatra corresponds to one particular bhuta, and is its universal or samanya rupa. It being the samanya form of a particular bhuta, is its upadana. Similarly, ahamkara is the samanya or universal form of bhutas and indriyas alike. Just as rivers and streams flowing in different divergent directions lose their identity when they come to mingle in the ocean, so also grahya (bhuta) and grahaka (indriya) with different and opposed natures, lose all distinctions when they are stationed in ahamkara. Once again, just as the rivers and streams come out of the oceans, so also out of this ahamkara, proceed the grahya and the grahaka. This abhimana which has reference to oneself or aham, is the abhivyakti or manifestation of this ahamkara. Now all abhivyakti being particular manifestation, is interpenetrated with nischaya buddhi. When there is a vibrant manifestation or sphurana of aham abhimana, then it does so with the certainty that "It is I". There is never a sphurana as "It might be I" or "It might not be I". There is again no such sphurana as "It cannot be I". It is for this reason that the abhimana of aham being interpenetrated with this sense of certainty, this sense is the universal or samanya form of abhimana. The buddhi with its sense of certainty is thus the constituent of ahamkara. It being the constituent of ahamkara, is its samanya or universal form. The Samkhya Karika writes, prakriter mahān, tatohamkāra. At the moment of susupti, there is the disappearance of buddhi-tattva. The constituents of buddhi-tattva, the three gunas rest in a perfect equipoise, leading to the disappearance of the buddhi-tattva. With the disappearance of the buddhi-tattva, the jiva is susupta, or becomes extinct, or on the verge of laya. Susupti has thus been called the daily extinction of the jiva. If on the other hand, the constituents of the whole universe, the three gunas rest in a perfect equipoise, then there is extinction of the whole cosmic order of things.

It must have been noted from the foregoing analysis that the samanya or upadana of the indriyas is asmita or ahamkara. Both jnānendriyas and karmendriyas (See Introduction. Sec. III) are manifestation of this samanya, asmita. This manifestation is made possible only through the play of sakti. The world of sights and sounds (See Ch. II) brings about a change or transformation in the indriyas, ears and eyes. Asmita or manas or the visuddha-sattva is thus of the nature of Sakti, through the manifestation of which, vibhavas are assimilated and Rasa-enjoyment is made possible.

112

ble. The evolution of visesas from the samanya is thus always the play of Sakti. Prakriti or Samanya in Samkhya analysis is sakti-swarupa (See Ch. IV). The jnanendriyas, like kaksu, srotra and jivha are all activated by asmita or abhimana, just as the karmendriyas, like pada, pani and upastha are all animated by asmita.

This Maha-samanya in Samkhya analysis is Prakriti ; the Maha-samanya in Vedanta is Brahma. The world of sights and sounds and tastes is only the manifestation of this maha-samanya. The underlying principle of individuation of Prakriti in Samkhya, and Brahma in Vedanta is Sakti-swarupa. Name and form are used in the Upanishads to indicate individuality (See Brhad-aranyaka Upanishad. 1. 4. 7). The development of the one into the many is the rise of name and form out of the primary principle. There is no suggestion that the modifications denoted by name and form are unreal. They have, of course, no reality apart from the Brahman. Nama-rupa is not what the English words name and form indicate. They correspond to the form and matter of Aristotle. The two together constitute the individuals of the world.6 In Buddhism, rupa stands for the gross body, and nama for the subtle mind. The Abhidhamma philosophy in discussing Paticcasamuppada, the law of "this arises depending on that", analyses in detail the relation between Nama and Rupa. In Abhidhamma Philosophy, Book I. Ch. VIII. Sec. 2. p. 113 (ed. by Bhikkhu Kashyap) the following sequence of dependent relationship is noted, the driving force in each case being ignorance. Depending on ignorance (Avijja), there arises the activities of life (sankhara). Depending on the activities (that yield vipaka), there arises Patisandhi consciousness (Vinnana) (in another birth after the expiry of this life). Depending on Patisandhi Consciousness, there arise the mental and the physical states of the being (Nama-Rupa). Depending on the mental and the physical states, there arise the six Ayatana, namely, eye, ear, nose, tongue, body and mind (Salayatana). Bhava comes after a long process of differentiation and individuation ; and "thus does originate the whole body of evils7. Bharata's concept of bhava is not essentially different from the Abhidhamma standpoint (See Ch. II. p. 45-48, and Ch. XI).

The common substratum in Samkhya analysis is Pra-

6 Indian Philosophy. vol. I. p. 188. Sir S. Radhakrisnan. (1948).

7 Abhidhamma Philosophy. vol. I. p. 214—ed. by Kashyap.

kriti ; in Vedanta, it is Brahman ; in Buddhism, it is Avijja.

The parting of ways between psychical and physiological functions and concepts in Samkhya system takes place at the manas stage. It is at this stage that there is for the first time, a bi-furcation of jnanendriya and karmendriya (See Introduction. Sec. III). Such parting of ways in Buddhism takes place in Patisandhi consciousness, when for the first time it divides itself into name and rupa. The driving force which brings about differentiation in the undifferentiated Prakriti or Brahman is of the nature of sakti. The tattva or the philosophy of this Sakti, which alone makes possible all enjoyment of Rasa is taken up for detailed discussion in Chapters IV and V.

II

When a Rasa is tasted on the palate, then it is either sweet or bitter, salt or astringent. A Rasa can be tasted only when it is imposed with a particular form, or when it is in a particular state. These sweet or acid tastes are once again not tasted as just sweet or acid, but are tasted as excessively sweet, or moderately sweet, or even mildly sweet. So it is the case with bitter or astringent Rasas.

There is a universal content or form of these six Rasas, madhura, amla, etc. Sweetness or acidity are the particular manifestation or coloration of this one universal or samanya Rasa. Each of these six particular manifestations undergoes different transformations, as it becomes characterised by the qualities in an excess or moderate or mild degree. When sweetness is tasted by the mouth, then the taste of it does not appear as just sweet, but its appearance is characterised by all such manifest forms as excess or moderation of it. There is a regular gradation and an infinite range of intensity in a particular Rasa. Though words might be lacking to denote all these different stages of intensification, these different stages can be felt and appreciated by many men.

The sugar-cane, the condensed milk and guda are all sweet. But each of these different varieties of sweetness has a very distinctive stamp. The sweetness of sugar-cane is very different from the sweetness of condensed milk, and so on. Though all these three different things are very distinct in their sweetness, there is no possibility of clearly denoting them by words, because words are lacking which can indicate

these fine shades of distinction. Though the differences between these wide ranges of taste may not be distinguished by words, still their differences can be easily recognised. Sweetness and acidity are thus the manifestations of one universalised form of Rasa. Sweetness and acidity are particular or visesa manifestation of this Samanya Rasa, which underlies them all. Sweetness is a particular manifestation and the excess or moderate or mild degrees of madhura, which characterises sweetness, are again manifestations of this sweetness. Sweetness, acidity, astringence or bitterness are all particular manifestations of this one universal Rasa. These particular manifestations are once again characterised by such qualities as excess, moderate or mild degrees of sweetness. The more particular a thing is, the further it is away from this universal common basis. Whenever a Rasa is tasted, it must be one of these six Rasas. Whenever a particular Rasa is being tasted, it must be either excessively, moderately or mildly so. In the process of evolution from the universal nature of things or this maha-samanya, there are different degrees of characterisation and specialisation. The Rasas in Alamkara and in Ayurveda have evolved out of the same ahamkara characterised by abhimana. The specialisation and characterisation have proceeded in two different directions ; but there is nevertheless, a universal samanya basis of them.

It should be remembered that the manifestation of the samanya rasa into visesa forms is always due to the play of sakti. It has just been noted that the samanya form of the Rasas in Alamkara and Ayurveda is asmita. The jnanendriyas, like caksu, srotra and jivha and the karmendriyas, like pada, pani and upastha (See Ch. I. Sec. III) are manifestations of this samanya, ahamkara, characterised by abhimana. Swarupa-sakti or cit-sakti is the swabhavika or swarupa-bhuta sakti, ever stationed in the swarupa of Brahma. All powers and magnificence of Brahma, and whatever is characteristic of Him, proceed from this swarupa-sakti. The rasattva of Brahma—aswadya-rupa rasattva, as well as aswadaka-rupa rasattva, equally proceed from this swarupa-sakti. This swarupa-sakti being of the nature of cit, is naturally endowed with cetana, and as such, can give distinctiveness to even the ananda of Brahma, and becomes distinct itself.

In Rasa enjoyment, the swabhavika swarupa sakti manifests itself in two forms. In one form, it gives to ananda

115

itself a distinctive delight of taste (aswadana-camatkaritttva).

In another form, it makes possible the enjoyment of that

ananda ; and in both forms, it infinitely diversifies ananda

and itself.

The excess, moderate or mild degrees of sweetness,

which characterise a sweet thing, are all its visesana or

sakti. There might be an appreciable degree of difference

between these different kinds of sweet things. The degree

and quality of sweetness of sugar, palm-candy and different

kinds of fruits show a great diversity. Each one is distinct

from all others. Again, the upadana or the constitutive

basis of palm-candy, sugar, and other sweet things are the

result or parinati of maya, charged with the three gunas.

Gunamayee maya, when charged with the cetanamayi sakti

of Para-brahma, has become the upadana of all these things.

Sweetness as such, on coming into contact with different

ingredients, becomes diversified. Similarly, the same one

Rasa becomes infinitely diversified on coming in contact

with swarupa-sakti, and becomes available for enjoyment.

Brahma is Rasa-swarupa, because of this play and manifesta-

tion of sakti. From time immemorial, swarupa-sakti is in-

separable from Brahma. The nature of this swarupa-sakti,

or visuddha-sattva shall be taken up for detailed discussion

in the next two chapters.

The vyapya of this universal samanya basis of Rasa is

one of these six Rasas. The vyapya of madhura and amla is

once again, intensity or moderation. The vyapya dharmas or

qualities are visesas, while the vyapaka dharma is samanya.

The dharmas or qualities which are dependent on another,

are vyapya ; while that other on which are dependent all

these, is vyapaka. In other words, all dependent relations

are visesas. But the thing to which everything else is

referred, is known as samanya. So all dharmas are charac-

terised as samanya-visesa or para-para relation. It is never

possible to take in only the samanya character of rupa, rasa

or gandha. The qualities of rupattva, rasattva and gan-

dhattva must be endowed with the peculiar traits of visesa,

before these can become the subject of knowledge and appre-

hension. Without thus being characterised by individual

visesa traits, the samanya could not be apprehended at all.

In the Samkhya scheme, the samanya rupa is the upadana ;

the visesa being a particular manifestation, is the upadeya.

The universal trait underlying all such particular manifesta-

tions is its samanya form, while the manifestations them-

18 (OP 179)

selves are upadeya or visesa. The Samkhya system is always speaking of the samanya as upadana, and the visesa as upadeya.60 The samanya rupa of sparsa or rasa, completely divorced from all particular manifestations, is not accessible to us. In other words, the substantial basis or the upadana of a particular manifestation, can never be the subject of human knowledge. Unless this samanya rupa be wedded to a particular form, there is no cognition whatsoever.

This samanya character of a thing has been called in Samkhya analysis tan-matrá. There are five such tan-mátras, as rupa-tanmatra, rasa-tanmatra, etc. The Samkhya does not recognise an absolute distinction between guna and gunin. When the Samkhya speaks of rupa, it means thereby not beauty as such, but an object which is beautiful. The absolute distinction between beauty and the beautiful form is the standpoint of Vaicesika system. But in the Samkhya scheme, the object itself is beautiful. An object can never be dissociated from form and shape, smell and taste. But in Vaicesika analysis, beauty and the object which is beautiful are quite distinct. Though rupa is to be taken in by the eye, the Samkhya holds that it is not possible for the eye to take in the universal form of rupa. This universal form of rupa is not penetrated or limited by particular manifestations of rupa, as green, blue or red. The rupa in which all particular manifestations have set (pratyastamita) or are incognisable (anabhivyakta), is known as Rupa-tanmatra. Rupa tan-matra as such, is not the object of sense-knowledge. It is available only to the Yogins and the gods.

The samanya character comprehends all particular manifestations. But a particular manifestation cannot be comprehended in another particular manifestation. The samanya state comprehending all particular manifestations, is of a universal nature. So if it were possible to enjoy the samanya state, the pleasure arising out of it, would be exceedingly great. It would be more intense than what it would be out of the enjoyment of particular states. It is because the pleasure arising out of the enjoyment of a particular state, is not comprehended in the pleasure arising out of a different state. It is for this reason that the samanya character of gandha and rasa is said to be gandha-matrika and rasa-matrika, out of which spring all particular manifestations of gandha and rasa. All possible manifestations are comprehended in this mother of these all, this samanya nature of gandha and rasa. The receptivity of human

indriyas is very weak. The indriyas cannot take in the

intense degree of manifestation of a particular guna, or the

infinitely subordinated manifestation of another guna. It

appears as dark both when the light is very dim, or when

it is excessively bright. Human indriyas are adapted only to

take in the middle states. The tongue cannot taste an exces-

sively sweet thing. Such an object would appear as bitter

to most men. But if the senses had been more powerful

than what they are now, then an excessively sweet thing

instead of appearing as bitter, would have appeared what it

actually is. The pleasure arising out of it would correspon-

dingly be of a much more intense nature. But it is not

possible, because of the comparative weakness of human

senses. Human organs of vision cannot take in either a

very distant thing, or a thing which is next to the eye,

These can only take in things, which are placed mid

between. If it were possible to take in things which are

far, and near, along with things which are placed mid

between, then the pleasure arising out of it would obviously

be very great. But it is hardly possible, because of the

incapacity of human organs of sense.

It might be of interest to note that the same position

has been accepted in European philosophy. In De Anima.

426b, Aristotle says similarly that the organs of perception

can only receive the middle states. "If voice implies a

concord, and if the voice and the hearing of it are in one

sense one and the same, and if concord always implies a

ratio, hearing as well as what is heard must be a ratio.' That

is why the excess of either the sharp or the flat destroys

the hearing. So also in the case of savours, excess destroys

the sense of taste, and in the case of colours, excessive

brightness or darkness destroys the sight, and in the case

of smells, excess of strength whether in the direction of

sweetness or bitterness is destructive. This shows that the

sense is a ratio". By ratio, Aristotle refers to the visesa

character of objects of sense, for samanya is ubiquitous,

without any reference or ratio to anything else.

Again, Aristotle writes in De Anima, 426c, "That is

also why the objects of sense are (1) pleasant when the

sensible extremes such as acid or sweet, or salt being pure

and unmixed are brought into proper ratio ; then they are

pleasant ; and in general what is blended is more pleasant

than the sharp and the flat alone ; or to touch, that which

is capable of being either warmed or chilled ; the sense and

118

the ratio are identical ; while (2) in excess the sensible extremes are painful and destructive. The universal content of rupa and rasa is not perceptible to human senses. But the indriyas of the gods and the yogins can look through the surface appearance, and take in the tanmatras as well. This taking-in of the tanmatras explains the very great delight of the yogins, even when they are enjoying ordinary objects of sense. They look through these objects of sense, and take in their universalised general character. In Alamkara literature, there are about eight or nine Rasas, like Sringara and Karuna. But there is underlying these all, the universalised general nature of Rasa. This universal general character of Rasa or its samanya rupa, is always manifesting itself in all these nine different Rasas. Sringara is as much a Rasa as Karuna is. Sringara and Karuna can have no separate existence, apart from the universalised nature of Rasa samanya. At the moment of apprehending Sringara and Karuna, this samanya nature of Rasa is being taken in along with such particular manifestations. This samanya is always being penetrated by visesa at the moment of Rasa realisation. It cannot be definitely said if there be such a thing as samanya vastu, completely separated and divorced from all particular manifestations. If there had not been any such samanya vastu, then how were it possible for these particular manifestations to flash out ? Their flashing out is a proof that these had been interpenetrated with this samanya character.

It should be clearly understood that though there is an infinite diversity in the sakti of Rasa, Rasa itself is essentially one. It is because of this sakti that Rasa manifests itself. This sakti or upadhi is the body or deha of Rasa. It might be unmanifest in a very subtle form in rasa ; or it may be clearly manifest in a grosser form. Rasa is ever associated with this sakti or deha. The separation into deha and dehin, as in the prakrita world, is not there in the visesa manifestation of the samanya rasa. The sakti or upadhi of Rasa is its deha. Even if Rasa be one, and even though there is no sa-jatiya,81 or vi-jatiya82 or swagata bheda83 in it, it cannot be denied that the visesa manifestation of the samanya rasa is equally true. The one Rasa becomes diversified as the result of different vibhavas and anu-bhavas. It is needless to add that this is from the standpoint of the average reader. But even here the vibhavas are a part and parcel of rasa. The knowledge of ghata

119

(ghata-jnana) is impossible without the ghata itself, yet akhanda-jnana is self subsistent (nirvisayaka).84 Similarly,

khanda rasa without the vibhavas and anubhavas cannot be imagined ; yet there is no manifestation of the vibhavas and

anubhavas in Rasa-samanya. When the vritti is viksipta, the bheda-bodha is clearly present; and non-identity of the

vibhavas (See Ch. II) with the subject must be admitted. In Rasa realisation, the vibhavas are equally present. But these

flash as anga of Rasa, and as non-different from it. This is what is called visista Rasa. In Rasa samanya, there is, of

course, no room for vibhavas. But there cannot be any enjoyment of Rasa samanya, except through visista rasa.

At the moment of the sphurana of visista rasa, there is the simultaneous presence of Rasa samanya. In other words, the

samanya and visesa are happily blended together in Rasa enjoyment. With the nirodha of the visesa portion, the

samanya portion is left over. The golden bangle is nothing but gold in a particular shape ; and the two are held

together in deep embrace (tadatmya). When one looks at the bangle, one sees gold as well. So when one enjoys

visista rasa, like Sringara and Hasa, or Madhura and Amla, one enjoys also Rasa samanya. The samanya Rasa itself

becomes individualised into visista Rasa, as a result of this visesa manifestation. When the distinctiveness (or

visesamsa) is taken away, or when this becomes unmanifest, Rasa is of a samanya nature. This is nir-visesa, or nir-akara,

without any manifestation at all. The nature of visesa which gives form and shape, a local habitation and a name to this

samanya character, shall have to be examined in detail here and in the following chapter.

This visesa may be looked upon as upadhi85. The bheda implicit in upadhi, brings about the differentiation in Rasa.

So long as one is under the dominance of viksipta vritti, this upadhi is bahya and anitya. In reality, this upadhi is neither

bahya nor anitya. So visesa is ever associated intimately with Rasa. Rasas are always many in number, and one Rasa is

naturally distinct from all others. The statement Rasa is one and unique is not incompatible with the statement that Rasas

are many in number. Rasa is at once one and many ; and this explains the essential nature of reality.

The upadhi is of the nature of sakti. Everything in this world is upadhi-swarupa. It must be remembered that

nothing in this world is a-nitya or a-sat. A particular form in which a thing is manifest, or becomes visible or acces-

sible, but which is never again possible in this world, is a-sat. Every moment brings about a change. But what is the nature of this change ? Different rupas appear in succession. In other words, the citta which sees or hears is gradually transformed into various vrittis. There is no rupa without vritti, just as there is no vritti without rupa. The two are inseparably associated together. The stream, known as kala-srota, flows on for ever. This cannot be checked by one in a viksipta mood. But if by any means, this ever-flowing stream can be checked, it will lead to sthairya: In other words, if vritti be sthira, rupa becomes sthira ; the sthairya or rupa in its turn, leads to the sthairya of vritti.

So the manifestation of a particular thing in a state of concentration (ekagravastha) is not fleeting or illusory. So long as there is concentration, there shall be before this sthira-vritti, rupa in an immutable and unchanging form. If this concentration be self-willed, or under self-control, and if one could rise above the turbidity of the changing prakriti, then the duration of the rupa also can be controlled at will. If for instance, there be prajna through concentration on a particular rose, and if that concentration or samadhi lasts for a thousand years, then that rose shall be present there for a thousand years. It will survive all changes of a viksipta citta. The concentration or samadhi is short-lived, because the roots of disturbance are ever present in the citta. But when the roots are exterminated (See Chs. IX, X and XI), or when rajas and tamas disappear and sattva becomes purified, then samadhi shall not pass away, and its duration will be self-willed.

All the several rupas of the universe are a particular manifestation or prakasa, an aspect of maha-prakasa or the Great Illumination. It is possible to revive that very same form even after the disappearance of samadhi, or if it disappears through the exercise of one’s will. Though it may have disappeared from the world, it is ever present before that Great Illumination. It only becomes unmanifest before the vritti-jnana. If this be correct, then all rupas are nitya ; all things are by nature, true. The manifest form is existent, so long as one wills it ; and as such, it is not outward form, but essentially one and identical with the Illumination.

If upadhi be ever associated intimately with prakasa, then there is for all time, an infinite diversity of rasas. But human knowledge being essentially an outcome of vritti, rasas might sometimes become unmanifest. When the veil

121

is removed, and avarana is taken away, then there is the manifestation of this ever present Rasa. It has to be admitted that the number and character of particular Rasas are countless. Sometimes, the visesa Rasa is unmanifest in the form of Sakti. Or it might be present in a manifest form. Though Rasa may be essentially one, there is in it Sakti for an infinite diversity. It is only at times that this sakti manifests itself. It is through swatantrya that Rasa manifests its infinite diversity, or takes into itself its manifest form. This sakti or upadhi is the deha of Rasa. It might be present in a very subtle form in Rasa, or it may be manifest in a gross, tangible form. There is an identity, or non-difference between this manifest form (deha) and rasa.

This is what happens in the suddha-vastha. A similar position is held in the sensuous world of sight, sound and taste. There is a deep significance in the infinite diversity of the world of sense. The facial appearance of each man, or each member of a particular species of bird and beast, a particular tree, or creeper or a little flower is the manifestation or vikasa in a tangible form of a particular bhava or rasa. These may not be pure manifestation. Man himself being the manifestation of a particular bhava, his physical form changes, according to the changing pattern of the particular bhava, of which he is the embodiment. Appearance is the deha of bhava, and is, as such, identical with it. On ultimate analysis, it will appear that there is manifestation of a particular bhava in a particular body. There are as many dehas as there are bhavs. There cannot be many bhavs, centering round one deha, though there may be many vilasas of one particular deha.

Visesa or bheda naturally goes with samanya or a-bheda, just as a-bheda is inseparable from bheda. The two are one. There is a-bheda even in bhedavastha; this a-bheda or samanya character, when over-whelmed is unmanifest in bhedavastha. So also in abhedavastha, there is the simultaneous presence of bheda. In reality, no one is the samya-vastha, or the complete reality (See Ch. IX) 'The samya-bhava is neither jiva-bhava nor iswara-bhava, neither bheda or many, nor a-bheda or one. It is both bheda and a-bheda, both many and one.

The Indian philosophers are divided on the question if there be such an entity as pure universality, without any visesa whatsoever. Kumarila Bhatta writes, nirvisesam na

122

samanya, or samanya is impossible where visesa is absent. But Kumarila's view is very gross. The Samkhya accepts the presence of nirvisesa samanya, or samanya without the simultaneous presence of visesa. The particular visesa states are appearing from the samanya nature, and once again, are getting absorbed and disappearing in it. The visesas are like wavelets, appearing on the surface of the sea of samanya. All visesas are sustained, because they are rooted in this samanya basis. If there had not been this samanya, then the visesas would have disappeared altogether. But so strong is the love for visesas, and so varied is their appeal, that very often the universal character of Rasa, in which are rooted all these visesas, is likely to be ignored. But it is useful to remember that the universal nature of Rasa is the constituent of all these different Rasas. The Upanishads also speak of this Rasa samanya, when they identify Brahma with Rasa itself, and not with any particular manifestation of it. The Upanishads write Raso bai sa. Rasa hyabayam labdhwa anandi bhavati. This is Rasa samanya. Rasa samanya is the mother of all particular manifestations; it is a state in which are comprehended all different manifestations of Rasa. To take in this Rasa samanya, without the simultaneous apprehension of all different manifestations of it, is like apprehending Brahma Himself. Brahma is nothing but the universal nature of things, in which are comprehended everything else. He is Maha-samanya. The grammarians also speak of "saa jati, saa mahanatma". Out of this universalised nature of things, all different particular manifestations proceed. It is in this universalised nature once again, that every thing else is comprehended. The Sruti in indicating the character of Brahma emphasizes His universal samanya nature. The Sruti writes, jato ba eemany bhutani jayante, jena jatani jeevanti. This is Brahma. This universal nature of things is the resting-point of the evolution, manifestation and involution of all particular states; this is what Brahma is in the purest sense. The word Brahma means Brhat or great. This great Brahma becomes limited or circumscribed as there is the manifestation of a particular state. The manifestation of a particular state is the manifestation of the littleness in man; the manifestation of the universal state is to be like Brahma. This universal nature of Brahma has been called bhuma. The Chandogyo writes (17.13. 1), jo bai bhuma tat sukham; nalpe sukhamasti bhumaiwa sukham.

123

is bliss itself ; there is no sukha in the limited spheres of

life. In speaking of the criteria of bhuma, the Chandogya

writes again (17. 14. 1), yatra nanyam pasyati nanyat- chrnoti,

nanyat-vijanati, sa bhuma ...... yo bai bhuma tadamritam,

yadalpam tanmartam. That in which nothing else is visible,

nothing else is audible, or nothing else is knowable, is bhuma.

Bhumā is life everlasting ; alpa or limited life is life subject

to death and decay.

The analysis of samanya and visesa of Rasa in Sec. II,

must have pointed out that all particular manifestations must

be rooted in a samanya basis. This applies not merely to

the different manifestations of the same thing, appealing to

one particular indriya. It appears that there is a samanya

basis of the Rasa speculations in Ayurveda and in Alamkāra.

This samanya basis, as has been already pointed out, is

the asmita, whose manifest form, or sakti-rupa is the manas

or visuddha sattva. Looking at buddhi, aham and manas as

dravya, kriya and sakti it will be seen that manas is sakti-

rupa, because it is kriya in its unmanifest as also in its fully

developed form ; aham is the act of grahana, and buddhi is

of the nature of dravya. Buddhi has often been called the

dravya of purusa-dravyamatram-bhoot sattvam purusa-syeti

nischaya.

The antah-karana is not exempt from the operation of

the three gunas. The parinama of asmita is threefold ; the

first parinama is prakhya-pradhana, leading to the evolution

of the jnanendriyas ; the second parinama is pravritti-

pradhana, leading to the evolution of the karmendriyas ; and

the third parinama is sthiti-pradhana or prana. The sthiti-

pradhana asmita87 is the deha or dharya-visaya. This is the

seat of the karanas. The asmita which is predominantly

pravritti-pradhana provides incentive to activities. The

dhrita-bhava, corresponding to pravritti-pradhana asmita, is

karmendriya. The prakasa--bhava, corresponding to prakhya-

pradhana asmita, is jnanendriya. It has already been noted

in the Introduction, Sec. IV, how there is a natural correla-

tion between the five jnanendriyas and the five karmendriyas.

The foregoing analysis must have revealed how the pravritti-

pradhana asmita, the subject-matter of investigation in Ayur-

veda, and the prakhya-pradhana asmita, the subject-matter of

analysis in Alamkāra, naturally go together. Both are held

together in the sthiti-pradhana asmita or the deha. The

manas or the visuddha-sattva is its sakti-rupa, which makes

possible the transformation of all alambana in the form of vibhava,

19 (OP 179)

(See Ch. II). into rasa. Asmita is thus the samanya basis of Rasa speculations in Alamkara and Ayurveda.

In Ch. II, it has been noticed how manas seated in the hrdaya, gathers all sense-impressions or ahara. It has been noticed further that sabda, sparsa, rupa, rasa are all taken in through the mediation of vayu. It should be clearly recognised that just as madhura, amla are taken in by the palate and brought to manas, so also the different shades of light, and the different degrees of sound are brought to manas by the eye and the ear. Human indriyas are capable of receiving only the particular manifestations or visesa rupa of this samanya rasa. It appears that the sister speculations of Alamkara and Ayurveda separated out, as the emphasis was placed on the visesa character of the Rasa, arising out of ahara brought in by two different senses. But the samanya nature of these two different Rasas is nevertheless unmistakable. When the samanya nature of these two speculations is emphasized, it will be seen that Sringara and Madhura, Hasa and Amla are one and the same. They appear different only because the grahaka indriyas are different in the two cases. All five mahabhootas enter into the making of everything. The relative predominance of one mahabhoota in one indriyartha accounts for how one indriyartha is to be taken in by the eye, or by the tongue. But that is no reason why the taking-in of the indriyartha by the eye (drsya), or by the ear (sravya) should be essentially different from the indriyartha taken in by the palate (swadya). These different indriyas only take in the visesa rupa of the one samanya rasa. So while Sringara and Madhura, and Hasa and Amla are different to outward view, their taking-in by the ear and the eye and the tongue points to the samanya character, which underlies them all. This samanya concept knits together the speculations of Alamkara and Ayurveda.

CHAPTER IV

Concept of Visuddha-sattva in Philosophy and

Aesthetics

It has been noted in Ch. I. Sec. II, that at the core of

Rasa-realisation, there is the play and manifestation of

sakti. It should be clearly recognised that Rasa enjoyment

would be impossible without the activities of this cit-sakti.

The jiva loses his jivatva on the flames of this cit-sakti and

becomes transformed into siva. The operations of cit-sakti

make possible this transformation of the jiva into siva90. It

is well-known that the finest form of aesthetic delight often

proceeds out of pity and fear, sorrow and lamentations.*1

The transformation and transmutation of pity and fear,

which are under the dominance of rajas and tamas (See

Ch. XI), must precede aesthetic enjoyment. The transmutation of the sthayi-bhavas into rasas is thus the result of the

operations of sakti. The assimilation of ahara in the form

of vibhavas (See Ch. II) is also the result of the operations

of sakti. The vibhava being ahara, is a distinct entity, separate

from the bhokta or the enjoyer. The two, the bhokta and the

bhogya or ahara, can become one only through the operations

of sakti. The nectar of the soma melts, when it comes in

touch with the agni (See Ch. IX). This molten state, in

which all distinctions are lost, is eminently the result of the

play of sakti. The other approach is the one, which believes

in separateness, or rigidity. According to this second view,

the jiva is still a jiva, even after purification from mala.

The jiva can never attain siva-tva.

It should be noted further that the sakti which comes

into operation in Rasa enjoyment, is the cit-sakti. Being

cit-sakti, the enjoyment proceeding out of its operations, is

the enjoyment of bhoga, or taking in outside things as

ahara (See Ch. II) and making them its own. This is very

different from the Vedantic maya, which is of the nature of

jada-sakti. There can be no aesthetic enjoyment with jada-

1 The doctrine of Katharsis in Aristotle’s Poetics, ch. vi, is a defence of

Poetry against Plato’s charges that poetry “feeds and waters the

passions” in Republic 606. See also “A new Interpretation of the

Doctrine of Katharsis in Aristotle’s Poetics—Sen. (Calcutta Review—

June 1956).

126

sakti. The only pleasure possible in the case of jada-sakti

is the pleasure of renunciation. This second standpoint is

echoed in the Bhagavad-Gita, where it speaks of rasa-varjan

niraharasya dehina. Bharata’s rasa-analysis which begins

with the taking-in of ahara, can never think of this path of

renunciation. This is more because, the standpoint of the

Bhagavad-Gita, is the way of sakti-tyaga, while the one of

Bharata is essentially the path of sakti-grahana. (See Chs. I

and V). The advaita stand-point, advocated by the Saivas,

the Vaisnavas or the Saktas is not opposed to either bhakti-

sadhana, or the Rasa-enjoyment. It is because the advaita

standpoint advocated in these systems is the result not of

any renunciation of sakti, but the result of the acceptance

of the doctrine of sakti. The Mahayana Buddhists similarly

accept the reality of Prajna-paramita, and have thus paved

the way to the doctrine of Bodhi-sattva-vada. The advaita-

vada of the Panca-ratrins is similarly the result of a perfect

harmony between sakti and saktiman. All these clearly in-

dicate the very great importance of the concept of sakti in

Rasa enjoyment.

The Maha-sakti which lies unmanifest in Him, first

appears at His behest, like the flash of lightning. Though

there is even in the unmanifest, avyakta stage, difference

between the sakti and the saktiman, there is as yet no

realisation of it. The Samkalpa or the wish which stimulates

the dormant Maha-sakti is the anirvacaneeya svatantra of

the Lord. Only a part of the Sakti is awakened, while the

rest of it remains unmanifest. The manifest sakti may be

either kriya-sakti or the bhuti-sakti. This kriya-sakti has

been referred to as the Saundarsani Kala in the Ahirbudhnya

Samhita. This is ever unchanged. But the bhuti-sakti unlike

the kriya-sakti, is ever active. Compared to kriya-sakti, the

bhuti-sakti is infinitesimally small. The kriya sakti is alone

responsible at the moment of creation, for the parinama in

the mula prakriti, for the Kalana in Kala, and for the bhoga

in the atman. It shall be seen how all these three positions,

the parinama in the prakriti, kalana in the kala, and bhoga

in the atman are implicit in the doctrine of rasa. All these

again are the result of the play of sakti, without which rasa-

realisation would become an impossibility.

It should be noted further that the swarupa-sakti, or

the cit-sakti is ever present in the swarupa of the Brahman.

All the powers and whatever characterises the Brahman

proceed from this swarupa-sakti. So the Brahman’s nature

127

as Rasa, both as something to be tasted and enjoyed (as aswadya), and as one who tastes it (as aswadaka) is the result

of this swarupa-sakti. This swarupa-sakti, being cit-sakti, is naturally endowed with cetana. So it can diversify the

ananda-maya nature of the Brahman. It itself can assume diverse forms and shapes.

The swarupa-sakti, which is natural to Brahman, assumes two different roles in the matter of Rasa enjoy-

ment. In one role, it makes possible the relish of the ananda by the reader or enjoyer ; in another role, it makes the

ananda itself relishable. In both forms, it infinitely diversi-

fies itself and the ananda.

Coming to the diverse manifestations of the relish or taste, it will be seen that the relish of sweetness is the sakti

of the thing, which itself is sweet. Sweetness may be of very different nature, for instance the sweetness of palm-

candy, sweetness of sugar, and of different kinds of fruits. Though all these are sweet, the sweetness of each one of

them is different from the sweetness of another. This is the visesa manifestation of the samanya sweetness (See Ch. III).

Again, the different constituents of palm-candy, sugar are all the result or parinama of the same trigunatmika maya.

The maya, charged with gunas, is transformed into all these diverse forms and shapes, when it is acted upon by the cit-

sakti of the para-Brahma. So the upadana or the constituent of all these different things, may be said to be the result or

parinama of the same trigunatmika maya. The same sweet-

ness assumes diverse forms, when it comes in contact with the upadana of different things, and so makes these different

things sweet in different degrees. At the same time, it itself assumes different forms. Similarly, the swarupa, self-same,

and unique ananda on coming in contact with His swarupa-

sakti, becomes infinitely diversified, and so in turn, becomes relishable.

Rasa as relish and rasa as the one, who relishes it, together make the Rasa-tattva. These two aspects of Rasa-

tattva are ever present in Him. It has already been noticed how Brahman becomes relishable as a result of the operations

of sakti. The swarupa-sakti is ever inseparable from the Brahman. So kriya and the result of this kriya, infinite di-

versity of this sakti and the ananda proceeding out of this infinite diversity of sakti, and the diversity of ananda itself,

are all present from time immemorial in Brahman. This ananda is being enjoyed as rasa. It naturally follows there-

128

fore, that rasa-enjoyment is the result of a deep embrace with sakti, Sakti in its diverse manifestations makes pos-

sible the enjoyment of Rasa.

I

If Rasa enjoyment be inseparable from cit-sakti, it is important to analyse the concept of cit-sakti in detail. This

cit-sakti is inseparable once again from the concept of visuddha-sattva, an idea which has dominated Indian

thought for centuries. It has already been noticed that the complete theory of Rasa includes both the aswadya rasa

and the aswadaka rasa. It should be noticed further that the concept of the aswadya rasa has been analysed in Ch. II,

and the concept of samanya rasa has been discussed in Ch. III. The concept of aswadaka rasa, or the visuddha-

sattva (which is inseparable from cit-sakti) will have to be taken up here and in the next chapter.

It should be noticed further that the operations of the cit-sakti, or the visuddha-sattva are dependent on the

achievement of certain preliminary conditions, on the laukika plane. The laukika plane in the case of Rasa realisa-

tion, is obviously made up of the vibhavas, anubhavas, vyabhicharibhavs, a detailed analysis of which will be

found in Chapters II, VII, and VIII. Nobody would ever identify the bliss of aesthetic enjoyment with vibhava,

anubhava or vyabhicharibhava, which are all constituents of Rasa. Rasa, though it springs from them, is neverthe-

less, categorically different from vibhava or anubhava. The unmanifest sakti brings about a change from bhava to

rasa, and the laukika vibhava, anubhava and vyabhichari-

bhava are transformed into rasa. There is always this parinama of bhava into rasa. This is made possible because

of the presence of sakti. This sakti is the visuddha-sattva,

which is the subject-matter of the present chapter, as also of the next.

The Samkhya system which attempts to give an ade-

quate explanation of the evolving world, looks at all parinama as due to the inherent sakti, or nature of the

primeval prakriti. It should be noted that prakriti evolves,

not because of any outside interference, but because of its own inherent sakti. The early Samkhya writers speak of a

visuddha prakriti, the repository of all sakti. The sakti-tattva offers a philosophical explanation of the theory of Rasa (See Ch. I Sec. II). Sakti-tattva serves to connect further the philosophical interpretation of Rasa from the Patanjala standpoint with the interpretation offered from the standpoint of the Vedanta of Ramanuja, Vallabha and Nimbarka. It is essentially the same as the analysis of sakti in the Mahayana, as also in the Saiva and Sakta Tantras. In Ch. III, in the discussion of samanya rasa, it has been noticed what an important place is occupied by the doctrine of sakti. The visesa manifestation of the samanya rasa is the result of the play of sakti. In this chapter and in the next, the theoretical or tattvic background of the concept of Rasa is taken up for a detailed investigation. A careful examination of the nature of this sakti is necessary for a clearer understanding of the philosophy of aesthetic enjoyment. This sakti underlies all manifestations, or parinati, and transition from bhava to rasa is no exception. The discussion of sakti-tattva should thus properly begin with an analysis of evolution from the standpoint of parinama-vadin Samkhya of Caraka-Patanjali.

The concept of sakti in Patanjala-Samkhya is again not very different from the concept of sakti in the philosophical schemes of Ramanuja, Nimbarka, Madhva and Vallabha. The Vyasa-bhasya I. 3, writes, swarupa-pratistha tadaneem citisaktir-yatha kaivyale, vyuthana-citte'tu sati tatha-pi bhavantee na tatha. At this stage, the cit-sakti is centred in itself. In Vyasa-bhasya I. 4, it is similarly held, vyuthane ya citta-vrittaya tada-visista-vritti purusa.91 The drasta-purusa is of the nature of caitanya. The buddhi, on coming in contact with the cit or purusa, reveals the world of sense. All which appear and are visible, are drsya. Rupa, rasa are all external manifestations or drsya. These become visible, because the cit which reveals all, is of the nature of sakti. The common standpoint in all such statements as "I see", "I hear", "I decide" or "I understand" is "I". The central point of interest in all these positions, is the seer, the purusa. The purusa is of the nature of cit. The buddhi can only reveal the sense-world (See Ch. II), when it is imposed upon, and activated by cit. So cit-sakti is indispensable in revealing the world of sense. The Patanjala concept of sakti runs through the full scale of creation or beings. It is implied thereby that drsya, citta, abhimana-ahamkara, ahamasmi buddhi, vivekaja-jnana, or purusa-pratyaya stand

130

in a hierarchy, where each posterior stage is charged with

a sakti to reveal the anterior.

The Patanjala school of Samkhya holds that a nonentity

can never come into existence, and an entity can never pass

away. The primary prakriti is at the basis of all manifesta-

tions. From prakriti evolves mahat, or the great cosmic

principle. It is also called buddhi, as it is held to be the

reason of calling it mahat

cosmic matter of experience. The reason of calling it mahat

lies in the fact that it is great in space as well as in time ;

for there is no other evolved principle, which is so exten-

sive and durable as this is. In the Yoga-bhasya. I. 36, it is

described as an extensive transparent stuff like the bright

sky. It should be remembered that mahat is little else but a

comprehensive collection of jnana-sakti. Mahan and full-

knowledge are synonymous. This extensive jnana-sakti,

without any deficiency, is known in the Samkhya system as

mahat-tattva, or buddhi-tattva. This buddhi unlike the

purusa, is unconscious, or jada. It is for this reason that

the Samkhya holds that on the surface of this jada, buddhi

is reflected the great purusa, who is Iswara in the Samkhya

philosophy.

In holding that the prakriti is always undergoing

changes, the Samkhya system acknowledges the role of sakti

in the cosmic creation. It has already been noticed how the

repository of this sakti in Samkhya-Patanjala is the mahat-

tattva. A closer analysis will reveal that the Samkhya stand-

point on Rasa (this being the proper background of Bharata.

See Ch. VI) is not different from the Vedantic standpoint of

Ramanuja, Nimbarka, Madhva and Vallabha. (See Sec. V-VI).

Kapila explains mahat as "mahadakhyam-adyam karyam

tan-mana". By this, Kapila probably meant an unlimited,

uncircumscribed, visuddha buddhi, which is not clouded by

the array of visayas. At the very beginning, there was present

only the purusa, who is of the nature of cit. So the first

evolute of prakriti, the mahat tattva does little else but

reflects the cid-atma. There is nothing to limit or circum-

scribe it. This is the mahat-tattva in the form of visuddha-

buddhi. This is the concept of sakti in Patanjala-Samkhya.

This is jnana-sakti, or cit-sakti. This is the dominating idea

of not merely Patanjala-Samkhya, but also of Ramanuja,

Madhva, Nimbarka and Vallabha. It may be noted here that

the earliest Samkhya speaks of visuddha prakriti, in which

lie unmanifest all energy and activity, and which acts as a

storehouse and reservoir of all sakti.

131

It is necessary to pursue the concept of sakti in the

Samkhya-system, as parinama-vada which occupies a very

prominent place in this philosophy, is also the result of

the play of sakti. Before taking up the concept of pari-

nama-vada in the Samphya system from the standpoint of

the gunas, it might be useful to note how the concept of

cit-sakti lies at the basis of Yogic practices. The agni

which is ignited as a result of yogic practices, burns the

body, constituted of seven dhatus. The Siddhas say that

the yoga-deha is rare ; there is no limit to its strength. It

is not injured by weapons, nor wetted by water ; it is not

burnt in fire, nor it can be held fast in fetters. It is even

more transparent than the sky. The method of how to

achieve it through the union of prana and apana (See Ch.

X) will have to be discussed later on. It should be noted

for the present that through such a balance and harmony

between contending, opposite tendencies, there springs an

intense fire. Tihs is known in Yogic terminology as

Yogagni. This cin-maya fire burns up this body, made of

seven dhatus ; and there appears for the first time an

absolutely new cid-deha. This is the siddha-deha, referred

to widely in the literature on Yoga. Diseases, old age and

death cannot touch this body. Rasa-enjoyment is only

possible through this cin-maya deha, and rasa-realisation is

essentially the result of the operations of cit-sakti.

It is well-known that citta and prana are inter-related.

Prana is the instrument by which the citta is to be conquer-

ed. Without the conquest of prana, there can be no siddhi

in Yoga. The conquest of citta and its purification are

synonymous, and go hand in hand. It has already been

noticed that all vibhavas are the result of the activities

of prana (See Ch. II), and as such indicate the play of

sakti. Rasa flows when the prana is held in deep embrace

by apana (See Ch. X), and there bursts out the flame of

cid-agni. This is yogagni. This is the fire, which burns the

dross in bhavs, and makes them pure gold in the form

of rasas.

The cin-maya deha, being rooted in this prakrita deha,

it is necessary to find out the influences, which operate on

the wordly plane. The influences to which everything in

this world is subject, are the three gunas, sattva, rajas and

tamas. This is the world of Prakriti, while the Purusa is

absolutely untouched by the gunas. It has already been

noticed in Ch. I. Sec. II, how the Prakriti in Samkhya

20 (OP 179)

132

system, the storehouse of all energy and activities, was

sought to be identified in popular religion, with the sakti

in the form of visuddha-sattva in Ramanuja, Madhva,

Nimbarka and Vallabha. This being so, it is important to

analyse the concept of prakriti as being operated on by

the three gunas.

The Vyasa-bhasya (III. 14) speaks of dharma as the

sakti of the dharmin. It should be remembered that the

Samkhya holds that the world is the result of the parinama

of prakriti, just as the Vedanta holds that the world is the

manifestation of the Sakti of Brahman. From this stand-

point, prakriti and maya are functionally identical. This

prakriti is the embodiment of Sakti, and is non-different

from the Goddess Parvati. Maya centres round Brahman ;

maya manifests Him. So also Sakti is inseparably associated

with Siva. Siva and Sakti unite together for the manifes-

tation of the world. The evolution of nada into audible

sound, and that sound itself becoming invested with mean-

ing (See Ch. I), all these are the result of the play of Sakti.

So also manifest world is the result of the evolution of Siva

through sakti. This analogy led to the belief that every

letter in Sanskrit vocabulary is a particular manifestation

of this primeval Sakti. This concept lies at the root of

the teachings of the Tantra, and is taken up for detailed

discussion in Chapters IX and X.

The parinama-silata of the gunas in the Samkhya is

the result of the play of sakti. The Samkhya speaks of

upadana as a karya—potential (karya-saktimat) vastu. The

upadeya is the result of the manifestation of sakti of the

upadana. The Samkhya which recognises both samanya

and visesa manifestation (See Ch. III), seeks to find a

logical connection between the two. This connection has

been found in the philosophy of sakti. The dharma and

the dharmin are non-different, but they are not identical.

The Samkhya recognises differentiation within an undiffer-

entiated entity. That which brings about differentiation or

parinama in the undifferentiated entity, is called Sakti,

inherent in the prakriti itself.

The Samkhya-yoga of Patanjali speaks of parinama as

the result of the sakti, inherent in prakriti. The ancient

Samkhya literature similarly speaks of visuddha prakriti,

as the storehouse of all manifestations. This concept of

sakti as underlying all manifestations, has been the subject

matter of detailed discussion in the sakti-vadin Vedanta of

Ramanuja, Nimbarka, Vallabha and Madhva. Aesthetic enjoyment being essentially the emergence of sattva from the potentiality of sthayi-bhava, it is a manifestation of sakti. This background of Rasa as the manifestation of visuddha-sattva (or the sakti) is taken up here for detailed investigation.

The concept of sakti as underlying all parinama, lies at the root of the speculations of the Samkhya. It should be noted further that this parinama as the manifestation of Sakti has also deeply coloured the speculations of the Vedantists, like Ramanuja, Madhva and Nimbarka. It is again, the same as the awakening of the Kundalini in the Tantras. Bharata’s Rasa as manifestation of the visuddha-sattva, or sakti has to be read against this wider background of Indian philosophy.

The underlying idea of the Yoga-bhasya III. 14 is difficult to understand. If the epithet “yogyata-bacchinna”92 be taken to be a qualifying attribute of “sakti”, then the sense of the whole sentence generally comes thus : the dharma is nothing but the power (sakti) of the dharmin, capable of giving rise to that effect only for which it is equipped with the necessary efficiency. Vacaspati attempts to bring out the significance of the said statement in two ways. Firstly, he states that the dharma is the power of the substance—the original matter, which constitutes the “earth”, and the like. Here the “power” is to be regarded as the capacity of producing dust, lump of clay, jar and similar other aspects that exist in the earth—their material cause, in an undeveloped state. Let it be granted that they may evolve from the said substance. But how to account for the fact that a jar has the capacity of bringing water, while the original substance in the shape of earth has not got anything as such ? This difficulty is removed by the epithet “yogyata-bacchinna.” This means that the power itself that generates the jar and such other forms is equipped with the efficiency of bringing water and the like. Hence the capacity of bringing water is not to be regarded as incidental. This has been inherited by the jar from its material cause, along with the said power by which it becomes manifest to the objective world.

In his second interpretation, he takes the expression, “yogyata-bacchinna” in its plural form, and thus making it a qualifying adjective of “dharminah”. By construing the sentence thus; he arrives at the following conclusion : the

134

dharmins or the principal materials are equipped with the necessary efficiency (yogyata-bacchinma dharminah); it is the power, which alone is to be regarded as the dharma (sakti-reva dharma). The power here is nothing but the "efficiency" already stated above. From this, it follows that "efficiency" only and nothing else is to be regarded as the dharma (yogyataiva dharma ityartha), and that which possesses this "efficiency" is said to be dharmin.

The Patanjala-Samkhya looks at prakriti as dharmin. Prakriti is self-propelled (swata parinamee). Motion is inherent in it. Impulse does not come to it from outside. Though it is equipped with infinite potentiality, and has got a natural proneness towards actualisation, yet it cannot always function. There is an obstructing force that stands as a barrier towards its functioning and unless it be removed, it cannot-act spontaneously. The efficient causes play their role here and render assistance to the prakriti.

This has been beautifully described by way of illustration in the Yoga-Bhasya (IV. 3). Just as a farmer with a view to irrigating the corn-fields does not himself carry water from the reservoir to the fields, but makes an outlet in the embankment, and when this is done, water flows to the distant fields out of its own accord; so also the efficient causes in the shape of "virtue" and "vice" do not move prakriti into action; they simply remove the barrier, and when this is done, energy or sakti from the prakriti is automatically liberated. Just as the same farmer does not himself force the water into the roots of the plants, but only weeds out the field, and when this is finished, the roots of paddy plants can easily suck in earth and watery juice; so also the efficient cause such as "virtue" only removes "impurity" that stood as a barrier in the way of functioning of prakriti, and consequently helps to liberate the energy, stored up therein. Speaking briefly, prakriti is the sole agent. Activity is inherent in it. The efficient causes do not move it into action. They only help to remove the barrier. When the barrier is removed, there is an automatic liberation of energy, so long confined in the womb of prakriti.

Bharata's Rasa speculations, with very great emphasis on the concept of paka, are deeply indebted to the prakriti parinamavada of Patanjala Samkhya (See also Ch. VI). It should be remembered further that the emphasis on the philosophy of sakti (See also Ch. I) by Bharata made it possible for sakti-vadin Vedanjists to offer an adequate and com-

135

prehensive philosophy of Rasa. The philosophy of sakti or

visuddha-sattva thus underlies the prakriti-parinamanavada of

Bharata’s Rasa analysis, or the Brahma-parinamanavada of

Ramanuja, Madhva, Vallabha and Nimbarka. The philosophy

of sakti underlies all Rasa speculations.

The Vyasa-bhasya (II. 18) reads. “tulya-jatiya-tulya-

sakti-bhedanu-patina pradhana-belayamupadarsita-sanni-

dhana gunatve-pi ca vyapara-matrena pradhanantaraneetanu-

mitastita ....................93 It should be noted that the gunas,

sattva, rajas and tamas are looked upon as sakti, and all

manifestation, change and disappearance are due to them.

The Vyasa-bhasya discusses further how certain saktis are

tulya-jatiya, while certain others are atulya-jatiya. The infi-

nite variety of bhavás (See also Ch. II for the Patanjala view

of bhava) is due to the manifold manifestation of sattvika

sakti, rajasa sakti, and tamasa sakti. The bhava whose consti-

tuent is always a particular kind of sakti, will by nature

correspond to that sakti. This sakti in laukika bhavás is

always a mixture of the three gunas, sattva, rajas and tamas

(See Ch. II and Ch. XI). Rasa-enjoyment being always the

manifestation of sattva, Rasa analysis is essentially an analy-

sis of the sattvika sakti. This sattvika-sakti, it must be clearly

understood, is essentially the same as visuddha-sattva. The

nature of this sattvika sakti in relation to rajasa and tamasa

saktis or gunas in the Samkhya system, is discussed in some

detail in this section. An analysis of the gunas, and the

parts played by them in the manifestation and evolution of

the world, would not be out of place in a discussion of the

nature of Rasa enjoyment.

The Samkhya system holds that no effect (or karya) is

without its cause (or karana). The effect is already present

in the cause ; the rasa is already there in the sthayi-bhava.

There is only manifestation of the effect, latent in the cause.

The karya is immanent as sakti in the karana ; the upadana

in the upadeya. The Samkhya which believes in sat-karya-

vada, can never think of any uncaused effect. The sutras

like “nasadut-pado nri-sringavad”, “upadaniyamat”,

“sarvatra sarvada sarva-asambhavad”, “saktasya

sakya-karanat”,94 attributed to Kapila, all speak of the im-

possibility of the creation of an entirely novel entity, not

immanent in the cause itself. The cause becomes manifest

into the effect only because of this inherent sakti. The two

different kinds of karaya, recognised by the Samkhya system,

abhivyajya-mana and utpádya-mana both presuppose the

136

presence of sakti. The evolution of the effect from the cause of the karya from the karana, of the upadeya from the bhava, all of them recognise the importance of sakti. From this standpoint, the asmita-rupa samanya of sarīra and manasa rasa (See Ch. III) is of the nature of sakti, or upadana or karana of their visesa manifestation. The pra-kriti-parinamayada of the Samkhya, or the Brahma-parinama-vada of the Vedanta of Ramanuja, Madhva, Vallabha and Nimbarka, equally recognise sakti as underlying all parinama. The question has to be discussed with reference to both Patanjala-Samkhya, and Sakti-vadin Vedanta of Ramanuja, Madhva, Vallabha and Nimbarka.

Almost all great Alamkarikas are agreed that Rasa-enjoyment springs from an evocation of Sattva. The bliss of aesthetic enjoyment which has been very frequently compared to union with the Supreme Being, is only possible because of this emergence of Sattva. In Samkhya analysis, the three qualities, Sattva, Rajas and Tamas have been called the constituents of the universe. The Samkhya Karika explains these qualities as follows. Sattva is essentially light, and it reveals ; Rajas is always on the move and is of a painful nature ; and Tamas retards and shuts us in. The Samkhya analysis divides the material world into two : Bhuta (things) and indriya (senses). The Yoga-Sutra (II. 18) says, "bhuta-indriyatmakam. .drsyam"95 —visible world is made of things and sense. The bhutas are called Karya (existent things), and the senses are called Karana. The world is thus made of these two. It is important to realise that these three qualities interpenetrate both Karya and Karana. A Karya or a Karana is full of Sattva when it lights up and reveals the world. The Yukti-dipika (I. III. 13) says that a Karya is Sattvic, if it goes up. This going up by itself proves that it is charged with Sattva. If on the other hand, it is heavy and slow-moving, instead of going up, it comes down to earth. Sattva is light, as Tamas is heavy ; and progression depends upon lightness, just as regression is the result of heaviness. The Gita refers to this dictum of the Samkhya, when it writes,

उद्‌ गच्छन्ति सत्वस्थाः, अधोगचछन्ति तामसाः।

The ancient literature of the Hindus is full of this three-fold division of the cosmic world. The Vedas and popular Indian literature speak very frequently of "Bhu", "Bhuva" and "Svar". This last, the world of

137

"Svar" is full of Sattva ; it is always unfolding itself ; it is the abode of the Adityas. The heavens and the sky constitute the world of "bhuva" ; it is full of action. This world of "bhu" is predominantly Tamasic in nature. The dyo-loka is the head of a cosmic god, which touches the heavens, and whose feet are planted firmly in the world. His bosom and shoulders constitute, as it were, the antariksha-loka ; and feet are the bhuva-loka. In the human body similarly, the seat of the Sattva is in the head ; eyes and ears, which reveal the world of sense, are placed in the head. The head is the dyo-loka ; similarly the trunk of the body is the bhuva-loka ; it is full of action, and is situated in the middle portion of the human body. The lower portion of the earth. The first glimmering of Sattva is felt through the eyes and the ears ; and these are all situated in the head. The bhuva-loka, which is always active, is presided over by the deity, Vayu.

The regions beyond the navel upto the ends of the leg, is full of Tamas, and is dominated by Earth. Yaska in the Nirukta divides the visible world also into three parts, and admits that there are three deities presiding over these three parts, one for each. Yaska says that Agni presides over dyo-loka, Vayu over antariksha-loka, and Aditya over bhu-loka. These three qualities thus characterise all Karya or existent things.

If these three qualities characterise the visible world, they also characterise the senses, or Karanas. Quick perception, exact apprehension, and capability of acting according to response are called in Samkhya terminology, "lightness" or felicity of faculties. The collection of mental images, the "abhimana" or possessiveness of Ahamkara, the perseverance of buddhi—all these are the works of Karana, charged with Sattva. Thus the lightness and revealing qualities of Sattva are manifested in both Karya and Karana.

Rajas characterises movement. This movement might take either of the two forms, (a) evolution or parinama, and (b) pulsation or parispanda. Evolution or parinama takes place when a thing loses its former self, by being worked upon by an attendant thing. Pulsation is also activity, the activity of the five pranas, as also of the five indriyas marked by asmita (vide p. 123). It should be noted that Tamas is heavy and shuts us in. This slowness of Tamas explains the going down of things (Karya) as also the lethargy

138

of the receiving senses (Karana). These three qualities on

account of their difference, help manifest the diversification

of these three gunas. The gunas being present both in

grahaka and grahya, the grahaka or the perceptor will only

perceive that guna, which is already dominant in him. The

Samkhya-Karika (Sutras. 10, 11, 12) says that these three

qualities give rise respectively to pleasure, pain and the

clouding of senses. Sattva gives rise to pleasure ; Rajas

contributes to pain ; and Tamas shuts us in. Sattva reveals ;

Rajas activates ; and Tamas works against both. These

three qualities are always working against one another ;

they are always giving way to another. But they are always

together and can never be separated from one another. If

a man, with predominantly sattvic karanas (senses) takes in

something, he appreciates the Sattvic elements of it ;

he is delighted and well-pleased. So also a man predomin-

antly Rajasic in character, can perceive only the Rajasic

elements in sense-objects. He is incapable of taking in

Sattvic elements, even when these are present. So also a

man of Tamasic nature, can only appreciate the Tamasic

elements or sorrowful elements in things of sense. He is

blind to the Sattvic or Rajasic elements, which are equally

present in it. These qualities are always struggling with

one another. The rise of one guna marks the decline of the

two others. It should be noted that conflicting gunas, when

overcome, instead of being a hindrance, become a help. That

is why these three gunas are ever inseparable, and always

giving rise to others. Rajas and Tamas, when overcome,

stimulate the growth of Sattva. But they destroy Sattva,

unless they are overcome, and kept in check. In this way,

in the predominance of one guna, the two other gunas,

which are subordinated, contribute to its manifestation. So

even when an action shows predominance of one guna, the

two others are present in subordinated forms. Varsagana

and other teachers of Samkhya hold, रूपातिशयाद्रुच्यतिशयाच्च

परस्परेण विरुध्यन्ते, सामान्यानि तु अतिशयैः सह प्रवर्तंते (96) — though

giving rise to one another, their nature is circumscribed, and

opposed to one another. Without forsaking their individual

traits analysed above, these gunas contribute to the develop-

ment of one another. Inspite of their inherent opposition,

these gunas can never be separated. They always go together.

The teachers of Samkhya are fond of referring to the

instance of the burning of a lamp, where we find the co-

ordination of the wick, the oil and the illumination. These

three are naturally opposed to one another ; but a lamp

burns for a long time by these being brought together.

The illumination results from the destruction of the wick ;

but the wick is not completely burned up, but preserved

at the intervention of oil. The illumination is opposed once

again to the oil ; but oil is used up little by little, and can-

not be burnt all on a sudden at the intervention of the

wick. In this way, though illumination, wick and oil are all

opposed to one another, the illumination is made possible

by the co-operation of these three. Thus Sattva, Rajas and

Tamas inspite of their opposition, give rise to mahat by

their mixing together. Mahat is self-revealing ; and so the

constituent of mahat and such other things, is Sattva, pure

and simple. But it should be remembered that in Sattvic

activities, though there is the emergence of Sattva, the

two other gunas are present in a subordinated form, and

help in the promotion of Sattva. So the two other gunas,

because of their subordination, help in the promotion of

Sattva. But if either of these two gunas, Rajas and Tamas

would have been dominant, then it would have worked

against Sattva. If these three gunas had been equally

dominant, then all activities should have stopped by their

complete neutralisation. So there must be a disparity

between these three gunas, so that there might be a Sattvic,

Rajasic or Tamasic activity. The Samkhya concept of

evolution holds that there can never be such a state where

two or three gunas are equally stimulated. It is because of

the bhoga (enjoyment) and apavarga (renunciation) of the

purusa that gunas suffer a change. A state which does not

contribute to the enjoyment or renunciation of the purusa,

can never be reached—because such a state is of no use

whatsoever. Prakriti suffers a change for the fulfilment of

the ends of the purusa. A state can never be reached

where there is only Sattva, contributing to the happiness

of man. So also there can never be the exclusive play of

Rajas or Tamas, contributing to sorrows and sufferings, or

stupidity. No one guna can for long dominate the show ;

for there are always the two others to undermine it. It

explains why a man cannot be happy for long, as also why

his rooted sorrow must necessarily be short-lived. The

Patanjala-Yoga-Sutra (4.15) writes, चलंच गुणवृत्तम् — the gunas

are always on the move, and are never stationary. All Karyas

21 (OP 179)

or accomplished works are tinged with these three gunas ; for

Karyas presuppose the play of these gunas. The constituents

characterise the accomplished thing ; and a thing is Sattvic,

Rajasic or Tamasic in nature on account of the predomin-

ance of any of these constituents. It explains why no one

single thing can please all. It might please the majority of

men ; but there will always be exceptions. A beautiful wife

might be a source of great and intense pleasure to her

husband. The Sattvic elements in her stimulate the elements

of Sattva in her husband. But she at the same time, gives

pain to the other co-wives of her husband. The other wives

take in her Rajasic elements ; and so she becomes a source

of envy and jealousy. This lady again, becomes a source of

Tamas to those others, who find her inaccessible. Pleasure,

disquiet and torpor are typical of Sattva, Rajas and Tamas

respectively. The Samkhya analysis looks at everything of

this world from the standpoint of these three conflicting

gunas. The Vedas on the other hand, do not speak of three

contending factors, but of two. The Vedas speak of two

contending forces, which are at the foundation of every-

thing in the world. The Vedas call these two opposite forces,

Agni and Soma. Agni withers and destroys ; Soma waters

and preserves. The Ayurveda recognises the opposition of

three qualities as in Sattva, Rajas and Tamas, as also of

two things, as in Agni and Soma. It appears that there is

no inherent conflict between the positions held in the Veda

and in the Samkhya. While the Veda emphasizes opposite

things, the Samkhya emphasizes opposite qualities ; and

things are constituted of qualities. Caraka takes over the

Samkhya tenet that harmony or balance means the dis-

appearance of conflicting gunas ; disequilibrium is at the

root of all creation. Vata, pitta and Kapha when mutually

balanced, are the source of health ; for health is nothing

but equilibrium or Samata. A body is diseased when there

is the dominance of any one of them.

The Samkhya divides all visible world into grahya

and grahana. Grahyas are visayas, and grahanas are

indriyas. Sabdas are jneya visaya, Vakyas are karya visaya,

and Sariras are dharya visaya. On analysing sabda visaya,

it shall be found that sabda jnana is prakasa, vibration of

sound is kriya, and the potential energy of vibration is

sthiti. The kriya and prakasa are the result of the potential

energy or sakti of vibration (Yoga-Sutra. II. 18).

This threefold division into prakasa, kriya and sthiti

141

characterises the karanas as well. The sravanendriya takes

in sound as āhāra (See Ch. II). The jñāna or knowledge of

sound is prakāsa-bhāva. The act of taking in of sound, or

the nervous impulse, originating with the vibration from

the physical world is its kriyā bhāva, and the energy stored

in the nervous system and the muscles, which when activat-

ed, leads to jñāna, is the sthiti-bhāva of the ear-organ. So

also, the tactile or muscular sense is the karmendriya, pāṇi

is its prakāsa-bhāva ; its movements are its kriyā-bhāva ;

and the latent energy in the muscles of the hand, is its

sthiti-bhāva.

There is no kriyā without sakti, and there is no bodha

or cognition without kriyā. The bodha or cognition is

preceded by kriyā ; and kriyā pre-supposes the existence

of sakti. The Samkhya system in emphasizing the import-

ance of sakti, holds that no kriyā is uncaused. This has

sometimes been called the sat-kāryavāda. Evolution is

already latent in the cause ; and the manifestation is only

dependent on the play of sakti.

The prakṛiti parināma-vāda of Samkhya, recognises

parinama as the result of the operation of sakti, inherent

in it. It should be clearly noted that in Samkhya analysis,

citta is jada, and cit-sakti coming under the domain of

prakṛiti, is jada-sakti. Cit being jada, the parināma-silata

of citta is only an aspect of prakṛiti-parināmavada in

Samkhya. But the same cit being sakti-svarupa in the

Vedanta, it is Brahma-parināmavada in Ramanuja, Madhva,

Vallabha and Nimbarka. The transition from the early

speculations of Bharata to the later interpretation by

Abhinavagupta, Mammata, Visvanatha is thus a shift from

the prakṛiti-parināmavada of the Samkhya to the Brahma-

parināmavada of the Vedanta and of Saiva and Sakta

systems. This transition would have been renderd other-

wise impossible, if all these systems had not equally re-

cognised the importance of cit-sakti in Rasa enjoyment.

The Brahma-parināmavada in Visistadvaita, and in Saiva

and Sakta systems, thus offers an adequate background of

the concept of Rasa.

The prakṛiti-parināmavada in Yoga-sutra and the

Vyasa-bhasya pre-supposes the existence of Sakti. In Yoga-

sutra. II. 3, it has been held that karya-karana bhavās like

avyakta-mahat-ahamkāra are the result of parināma. The

gunas are always undergoing transformation (parināma) in

the order of mahat, ahamkāra, etc. In Yoga-Bhasya, II. 4,

142

it is held that klesas are lying in a dormant stage in a latent form as sakti in the citta. Prasupti is sthiti in a vija form. This is unmanifest sakti. The Vyasa-bhasya says that the state of samskara is pra-supti. Certain dormant or unnoticed samskaras may not come to fruition at present. But they will bear fruits in future. These are what is known, as prasupta klesa (II. 4). Bharata's sthayi-bhavs similarly are the result of evolution of praktani or idanccntani vasans, issuing from samskaras. The sthayi-bhava can thus be looked upon as stored-up energy, or prasupta kilesa. Rasa realisation is essentially a liberation of the stored-up energy in sthayibhava. This process of liberation is always accompanied with the play and manifestation of sakti. The process itself is essentially a clarification, or purification where the dross of sthayi-bhava it transformed into rasa of aesthetic enjoyment (See also Chs. IX, X and XI).

The Vyasa-bhasya II. 4 explains prasupti as "cetasi sakti-matra-pratisthanam vija-bhava-pagama".97 It should be noted further that the Vyasa-bhasya finds points of affinity as also difference between prasupta klesa and dagdha-vija-kalpa klesa. While prasupta klesa flowers forth or becomes udara, the moment it is provided with an alambana, dagdha-vija-kalpa-klesa even when provided with an alambana cannot manifest itself. Bharata's repeated references to Rasa enjoyment as very similar to the enjoyment of curry, formed out of different ingredients, shows this awareness of the philosophy of sakti. It appears that the reference to sthayi-bhava as vija in Ch. 6. sloka 33 (Banaras ed.) by Bharata is no accident, but is an echo of Patanjala analysis of prasupta samskara as sakti-matra in the form of vija (Vyasa-bhasya). II. 4). It should be remembered further that Bharata's sthayi-bhava (springing from vasana) issues out of klista samskara ; this klista samskara again springs from sa-vija (vyuthana) samskara. There is throughout a manifestation of sakti from its beginning in sa-vija samskara to its culmination in vasana, leading to Rasa enjoyment (bhoga). (Vyasa-bhasya. II. 12). Bharata's awareness of this sakti-swarupata of vasana and sthayi-bhava is confirmed further by his reference to visuddha sattva, immediately before sloka 93 in Ch. VII of the Narya-sastra (Banaras ed.). The sakti-rupata of visuddha-sattva, as the core of Rasa enjoyment has to be examined in detail in this and the following chapter.

143

II

In Rasa-enjoyment, there is the emergence of Sattva. Bharata in Ch. VII of the Natya-sastra, discusses how Sattvika-bhavás always go with the enjoyment of Rasa. From the foregoing analysis it appears that at the moment of Rasa-enjoyment, Sattva is partly dissociated from Rajas and Tamas. It has already been noticed that Sattva can never be completely dissociated from these two, so that it is important to note that Rasa-enjoyment is always of the aprakrita visuddha-sattva. The question naturally arises how there is the emergence of Sattva through the reading of poetry and drama; this emergence of Sattva is Rasa-realisation.

The ancient writers have prescribed the use of powdered nirmali fruit for the removal of the turbidity of water during the rains. The thick juice of nirmali fruit, like the paste of sandalwood on first coming in contact with water, makes it even more turbid. But within a short time, the nirmali paste spreads out in countless threads, and reaches every corner of the vessel. This nirmali paste is of a slippery nature; and the turbidity of the water is gradually removed by this slippery paste. The spreading out of nirmali paste in countless threads, is due to what in the Ayurveda, has been called, the quality of sari. This quality is very prominent in poisons and liquors. If a man is poisoned in one part, his system is immediately affected. So also on even drinking a little wine, a man shows signs of unbalance. The reading of poems and plays thus spreads rapidly throughout the mind of the reader. There is no unclean corner of the human mind which is not affected with the reading of poems and plays. A fuller discussion of the process of this removal will be made in Ch. VIII. But it should be remembered that with the removal of impurities, human mind (citta) becomes the transparent mirror in which átman (soul) which is ánanda (bliss) incarnate, is reflected. This is the stage of Rasa-enjoyment. Bliss subsists so long as the soul is pure. But a man with an impure soul is not in a position to enjoy such bliss. The man with a purified soul; is a detached spectator. But a man whose soul is impure with Rajas and Tamas, can never be detached. The Yogi attains this state of purification through disinterested service to the country; the worldly

wise man can be purified for a time as a result of reading

poems and plays. The man with a purified soul, because of

this detachment, feels excess of delight, which is impossible

through sensuous gratification. This excess of delight is to

be had only when the soul is free from impurities. At this

stage, the soul is detached, disinterested, and free from all

kinds of directed pleasure.

III

The Mahabhasya means by Sattva, a substance, or

dravya. The doctrine of action-passion in Aristotelian

analysis is very similar to the doctrine of tāpya-tāpaka, as

developed in the Mahabhasya. It is to be noted further that

the material thing which is being acted upon (tāpya) is

Sattva, while the passions (tāpaka) are either Rajas or

Tamas (Vyasa-Bhasya. II. 17). Absolute purification is

unattainable in this world. The Upanishads say that to be

without gunas, meaning Rajas or Tamas, is to become

absolutely purified. So rare is this absolutely purified

Sattva, that it has been called the character of Brahma ;

तस्पोपाधि: प्रकृत: सत्व:। (Yoga-sutra).88 Early Samkhya

teachers looked at Sattva as a substance. In the different

stages of Samkhya, we find the concept of Visuddha-

prakriti. and visuddha-Sattva are not

essentially different, in as much as Sattva in early Samkhya

analysis, being of a substantial nature, is close to the

concept of prakriti.

This concept of Sattva in early Samkhya analysis has

evolved through various stages of development. The great-

est achievement of Samkhya seems to be the recognition of

one principle, which has evolved through different stages

of development, and gone into the making of this manifold

universe. The Samkhya teachers are broadly classified into

four groups, (a) Kala-vadin, (b) Parinama-vadin, (c) Iswara-

vadin, and (d) Swabhava-vadin. It should be clearly under-

stood that in all four branches, one unifying principle, one

primordial element is recognised as the mother of all crea-

tion. The Samkhya explains the creation of this universe

by the principle known as समन्वयात्। In the Bhamati,

Vacaspati Mishra explains what is meant by this principle.

Vacaspati writes,

145

यानि च येन रूपेण आ स्थूल्यात् आ च सौम्यात् समन्वीयन्ते तानि तदात्मक

सामान्यपूर्वकानि लोके दृष्टानि । यदा मृतात्मसामान्यतया समन्विता घटादयो

विकारा मृत्सामान्योपादानका लोके प्रसिद्धा । (99)

Vacaspatī means by this that existent things (Kārya-vastu)

in palpable or intelligible forms, or in any condition,

appear before us all the time charged with a universal trait

which persists all through these changes; that universal

form is the constituent of everything. A thing can never

be divorced from its constituent; and that constituent

which enters into the making of everything, is known as the

universal element.

In their search for such a universal principle, the

Samkhya teachers singled out at different stages of develop-

ment different principles. The Iswar-vadin branch of

Samkhya, as developed by Patanjali in Yoga-Sutra, looks at

prakriti as such a universal principle. The Vyasa-Bhasya

writes that out of buddhi or linga-matra, have evolved

ahamkara and the five tan-matras, or these six avisesa.

Eleven indriyas have evolved out of this ahamkara, as also

the five tan-matras. Out of the five universal primary

elements (panca-mahabhuta) have evolved five elements or

visesa. Prakriti represents the ultimate constituent of the

universe. Through gradual refinement and more comprehen-

siveness, we travel from sense to intellectual apprehension

of this essence of things. The Samkhya calls this prakriti

the nascent form of universe. It can be anything, and is

everything; it can be transformed into every shape and

form. Prakriti extends everywhere. It is beyond the compre-

hension of common man how one principle in all its diverse

manifestations, has been the material cause of this universe.

The Samkhya teachers who had such a comprehensive view

of Prakriti, have been called Brahma-vadin or Iswara-vadin.

Clay when imposed with a form, becomes either a pot or a

jar. But clay as such, is not intelligible to sense. This

Samkhya analysis of particular and universal is not very

different from the Aristotelian concept of matter and form.

Clay as such is less intelligible than a clay pot; or a clay

jar. So also gandha (smell) which characterises earth, is far

less tangible than clay as such. Again, the constituent of

gandha as such, ahamkara or buddhi is far more refined

than gandha-tanmatra; and prakriti out of which buddhi-

evolves, is the most refined of all. Refinement with compre-

hensiveness has reached its acme in prakriti. In this way,

146

according to Samkhya analysis, all jada-varga (which com-

prehends all visible world) culminates in an all pervasive,

absolutely unintelligible world. It should be noted that the

purusa in Samkhya analysis, is beyond the activities of this

prakriti, though it is for the bhoga and apavarga of purusa

that the prakriti evolves. This mundane world is charged

with three qualities. These are pleasure, pain and stupor,

symbolised in Sattva, Rajas and Tamas. The world came

into being, because of the interplay of these three gunas.

When the gunas are unbalanced, there is the creation of

the world. When the gunas reach a balance and perfect

harmony, there is an end to all activities. All the gunas

cannot be equally stimulated at the same time. The unequal

development of gunas is at the root of all creations. Sattva

predominates in all Sattvic activities. All activities in

Samkhya, are analysed from the standpoint of these three

gunas. Unbalance of gunas leads to creation ; balance and

harmony leads to effacement. It is usual for the gunas either

to reach a balance or be thrown out of it. The Ayurveda has

taken over this basic principle of Samkhya—that balance

leads to cure or effacement of diseases ; unbalance of three

principles, vata, pitta and kapha gives rise to different

diseases. The creation of disease and creation of this world

of sense follow the same pattern and principle.

The Swabhava-vadin Samkhya teachers recognise two

parinamas of the prakriti. This prakriti is always undergoing

changes. One is sadrsa parinama ; the other is

visadrsa parinama. The Vyasa-bhasya says that with

sadrsa parinama, there is an end to all creation,

just as with visadrsa parinama, there is the evo-

lution of the world. Both these parinamas are self-

originated. This view appears at the first instance to be

contrary to reason. Prakriti is unconscious ; and an uncon-

scious entity is not expected after all to work for an end

which it itself does not understand. This urge to activity on

the part of an unconscious entity for the sake of a conscious

one has been explained in the Karika by the simile of the

cow and the milk it produces. (Ka. 57). Just as milk in the

cow is secreted for the nourishment of the calf, similarly

the unconscious prakriti also functions for the purpose of

purusa. The problem has also received the attention of the

followers of Varsaganya (Yukti-dipika. p. 170. ff.). It is

like the excitement of the physical body of a male for union

with the female. This is drifting towards the theory of spon-

taneous origin of the universe,

The Samkhya which underlies aesthetic speculations,

seems to have been deeply influenced by Kāa-vadin teachers.

The Kāa-vadin teachers also draw their support from the

sutra, अन्वयात्। If all things are ultimately to be traced

back to one principle, as it is Iswara with the Iswarabadins,

or parinama with the Parinama-vadins, it can as well be

Kāa. The champions of Kāa are of opinion that everything

exists in Kāa, and Kāa enters into the making of every-

thing. The perception of a thing is not possible, if it is not

fixed in Kāa. The Kāa-karanikas hold, न मोऽस्ति प्रत्ययो

लोके यत्र कालो न भासते, there can be no knowledge without

reference to time. The position of the Kāa-karanikas

is defended, like the positions of Swabhava-vadins and Pari-

nama-vadins ; and all derive their authority from the Sutra,

अन्वयात्। Similarly, there is another school of thought,

which recognises Sabda as the fundamental principle of the

universe. The logic which helped establish prakriti as the

fundamental principle of the universe, has been equally

effectively used by the Kāa-karanikas in establishing Kāa

(time) and Sabda-dvaitavadins in establishing Sabda as the

constituent of the universe. So also the Buddhists have

championed Vijnana, and the advaita-vadins Brahma as the

one underlying principle of this changing world. It shows

the very great importance of the Samkhya doctrine, अन्वयात्।

The Alamkarikas, particularly Bharata, seem to follow

both the Kala-vadin, and Iswara-vadin traditions of Samkhya.

Bharata's indebtedness to Iswara-vadin branch of Samkhya is

very apparent, inasmuch as he seems to belong to the

tradition of Patanjali. His indebtedness to Kāavadin branch

is less apparent. Caraka though he belongs to Iswara-vadin

branch of Samkhya, does not deny the very great importance

of Kāa in the study of health and disease. In Sutra-Sthanam.

Ch. 6. 2-6, Caraka discusses the change that comes over the

world in course of the different reasons. In Sarira-Sthanam.

I. 33-34, Caraka discusses the question once again, Susruta

also writes : रससम्पत्तव्यापत्ती कालायत्ते ।(100) In Sutra-Sthanam. 6.7,

Caraka refers to “mahendra-utsava”, which is usually held

at the beginning of autumn. He is of opinion that diseases

and their cure are rooted in time (Sutra-Sthanam. 6. 4-5).

22 (OP 179)

148

Bharata's Rasa-speculations are undoubtedly influenced by

the Iswara-vadin speculations of Patanjali. But it seems that

Bharata is prepared to accept "time" also as an important

factor in the evolution of Rasa. This will be clear when it

is remembered that Bharata traces the origin of drama from

this same Mahendra-vijaya (Natya-sastra. Banaras ed. I. 56).

Bharata discusses at length

In Ch. 27 on Siddhi-vyanjaka, Bharata

the part played by Kala in successful stage performances.

In Slokas 85-95, time is considered as an essential element

in the successful evocation of sentiments. For instance in

Sloka 91, Bharata says that songs depicting Sringara-

Rasas are to be played at evening. In Sloka 92, Bharata says

tearful songs are to be played in the morning. Bharata

says in Sloka 94, that plays should never be staged without

taking into consideration appropriateness of time and place.

The great importance of time is recognised once again in

the analysis of uddipana vibhava as moon-lit night, soft

blowing wind at evening contributing to the evolution of

Sringara-Rasa.

IV

This evolution and involution or in other words,

emergence and absorption have a terminus-one in the

descending order and the other in the ascending order. In-

volution culminates in prakriti ; while evolution through

gradual progression, almost reaches the ultimate cause.

But evolution according to Samkhya is the gradual develop-

ment of what existed inherently within the primary cause

in a diffused state. It is the process which makes the under-

developed or less developed one more developed, the inte-

grated or the less differentiated one more differentiated.

The author of the Yoga-bhasya clearly brings home its

significance by the expression

तत्र तत्त्व संसृष्ट विविच्यते ॠमाणतिबृंत्ते:। (101)

(II. 9). The whole process is confined within the primary

cause itself ; it cannot overstep it. That which evolves stays

within the cause. It is not detached from what gives rise to

it. It is immanent therein. Still it is differentiated from the

cause as its effect. It is nourished and brought upto its

fullest extent —विवृद्धिकाष्ठामनुभवन्ति । (102) —(Yoga-bhasya.

II. 19).—therein by following a definite order of sequence

which cannot be violated. Vacaspati is found to elucidate the

point in his commentary by way of illustration. He says

that the seed of the banyan tree does not bring out all on a

sudden the full-grown tree, with its thick foliage, capable

of protecting us from the scorching rays of the sun. The

tree comes out gradually, because it was already latent in

the seed. The root, stem, leaves and branches come out

gradually in an ordered sequence, brought about by con-

tact of the seed with earth, water and heat and other

accessories. Similarly the evolutes do not appear suddenly.

They follow a definite order of succession.

Bharata's Rasa-analysis strictly follows this Samkhya

concept of evolution and involution. According to Patanjala

analysis, the manas is of the nature of a substance, much

as psyche in early Aristotelian analysis is a substance.

Susruta calls manas उभयात्मक: (Sarira-sthanam. 1. 4). The

end of involution or absorption is reached when the

Rajas and Tamas, which stand in the way of Rasa-enjoy-

ment, are absorbed together with the requisite amount of

Sattva in the substance of the manas. This is one terminus

of the Samkhya concept as applied to Bharata's analysis.

This substance of the manas which has swallowed up the

Rajas and Tamas, represents one stage in the evolution in

Samkhya analysis. This evolution of prakriti is always

through the union of opposites. This applies equally to the

analysis of soul in the Upanishads, as also to the analysis

of Samkhya. The five koshas recognised by the Upanishads,

are anna-maya, prana-maya, mano-maya, vijanna-

maya, and ananda-maya. Bharata's Rasa-analysis begins

with indriya-indriyartha-samyoga. At the initial stage

of this samyoga, the prana-maya kosha is fed with

whatever the different indriyas bring in to it. It should be

carefully noted that the Upanishads look at the working of

different senses as manifestations of the prana-maya kosha.

The Chandogya-Upanishad (5. 1. 15) writes,

न वै वाचो न चक्षूंषि न मनांसित्याक्षते प्राणा इत्येवाचक्षते प्राणो ह्येवैतानि

सर्वाणि भवति । (103)

"Men do not speak of a sense of speech, or faculty of

sight, or of hearing, or of meditation, but speak of a group

of pranas, which does all these. For these are all manifes-

150

tations of prana”. All these sense-faculties are thus seated

in the prana. It has already been noted in Ch. II, how

heart in controlling the streams of prana-vaha srota

(Caraka. Vimana. Ch. 5.4) is thereby controlling the

different senses.

In the process of evolution, beginning with prana, or

sense-knowledge (with which all are immediately concerned

in aesthetic appreciation), there is a synthesis of opposites.

The proper sphere of the activity of prana is confined to

the vibhava stage. It has been noted in the analysis of

vibhava in Ch. II, that all informations gathered by prana,

are forms of ahara. Bharata’s imagery of the process of

cooking in describing Rasa-evolution in Ch. 6 is not merely

analogical, as it has been very often supposed. It is ahara,

because the vibhavas are to be taken in through the senses,

and whatever is taken in through the senses, is ahara. The

analogy of cooking is very appropriate, because it is the

process of purification of bhava from the play of Rajas and

Tamas, so that we may reach the Rasa-stage.

Bharata’s Rasa-analysis thus begins with the prana-

maya stage. From prana-maya kosha, the soul (following

the Samkhya analysis) passes on to the mano-maya stage.

While prana-maya kosha is strictly confined to the Vibhava

stage, at the mano-maya kosha, the process of Rasa-

realisation has already begun. This further explains how

it is that Rasa-realisation is of one, who is सुमनः। The

manas is characterised by two gunas, Samkalpa (determina-

tion) and Vikalpa (doubts). The essence of Rasa-realisa-

tion according to Bhatta Sankuka is the mastering of

doubts, arising out of anumana, by strong determination.

Samkalpa (determination) is ever opposed to Vikalpa

(doubts), so that the passage to the next higher stage of

Vijnana-maya kosha is achieved once again through the

synthesis of these two opposites. At the Vijnana-maya stage,

the soul is once again cleft into two. These are anukul

(favourable) and pratikul (unfavourable) cognition, and the

mastering of pratikul by anukul, and the consequent puri-

fication, characterises the Vijñana-maya stage.

Prakriti is the fundamental substance out of which the

world evolves. In the unmanifested condition, prakriti is

something where all opposites are held in abeyance. When

they are all held together in a state of equilibrium (sāmya-

ta), there is no action. The state of rest is said to be

vasthā), there is no action.

151

the natural condition of prakriti (Yoga-Bhasya. II. 18). Yet the absence of outer activity does not mean the absence of any tendency to act. The tendencies to manifestations (Sattva) and activity (Rajas) are held in check by the tendency to non-manifestation and non-activity (tamas). The Samkhya conceived the supreme principle of the world as a unity with a real opposition of element. An abstract unit can be either perpetually active or perpetually inactive. When there is a disturbance of the equilibrium of the gunas, we have the destruction of prakriti (prakritinasa), the relieving of the tension by the overweighting of one side, and the setting in of the process of becoming. Prakriti evolves under the influence of purusa. The fulfilment of the ends of purusa is the cause of the manifestation of prakriti in the three specialised states. Since prakriti is one and ubiquitous, all things have prakriti for their basis, and in a sense, everything shares the characters of everything else. In Rasa-analysis, the mano-maya stage is expected to play the part of sakti with reference to particular Rasas. The passage from bhava to rasa, leading to the emergence of sattva, free from the turbidity and disquiet of passions, must then begin with the mano-maya stage. For Bharata is emphatic that Rasa-enjoyment is of the sumanasa, who is also a preksaka.

In the analysis of sensations in Ch. II it was found how manas acting through the indriyas seated in hrdaya, gathers all sense-impressions. Manas uses Vayu as its instrument. This is very appropriate, for Vayu according to Susruta, shares the qualities of Sattva. The disquiet of passions in the manomaya stage is the result of the presence of both Samkalpa and Vikalpa. In Yoga-Bhasya (I. 9) the nature of Vikalpa has been analysed. Vikalpa has been defined as शब्दज्ञानानुपाती वस्तुज्ञो विल्पकः (104) The Vyasa-Bhasya analyses Vikalpa into three parts—vastu vikalpa, kriya vikalpa and abhava vikalpa. When the same thing is said in two forms, then Vikalpa accounts for the difference. Thought or contemplation cannot be perfectly true, unless it is freed or purgated from vikalpa. The ascetics in their samadhi come to know the ins and outs of things through this just knowledge or prajna. Prajna which is ऋतम्भरा, is opposed to all forms of Vikalpa. It thus appears that Prajna is reached through the suppression of vikalpa, which is rooted in the manas.

152

Just as Vikalpa stands in the way of complete under-

standing by the manas, and has to be overcome by

Samkalpa, so there are favourable (anukul) and unfavour-

able (pratikul) cognitions of the buddhi. The soul is held in

bondage, so long as it does not look beyond both these

cognitions. Vidya and avidya, being rooted in buddhi, are

the causes of liberation and bondage. When buddhi achieves

this vidya or anukul cognition, then the purusa becomes

separated. But even when purusa is separated, it is un-

changed. At the moment of union with purusa, the buddhi

appears to be of the same nature with it. At the moment of

separation, the purusa exists by itself. Such cognition of

the separate existence of the purusa is also seated in the

buddhi. The vidya or anukul cognition of the buddhi is to

know that the purusa exists by itself, alone, ubiquitous,

untrammelled by any other thing.

V

This gradual separation of the purusa from prakriti

is purification, which the Samkhya teachers are never tired

of expounding. In aesthetic speculations, it assumes the

form of detached enjoyment of the appreciator or bhokta.

The art-experiencer enjoys the work of art, but he is not

engrossed or held by it. In Yoga-sutra, I. 19, we have

भवप्रत्ययो विदेहप्रकृतिलयानाम् (105) The word "भव" has

been variously interpreted. Vacaspati Misra explains "भव"

as "avidya"; Bhojaraja explains "भव" as samsara.

Vijnana-bhikshu means by it the cycle of birth. The

Buddhists speak of "भवपचथ्या जाति" or the determining

cause of birth is bhava. Similarly in Bharata's Rasa-analysis,

the determining cause of the evolution of Rasa, is bhava.

There is a good deal of evidence to show that Bharata's

analysis of Rasa-evolution follows the Samkhya concept

of evolution, as also the analysis of suddha-sattva in

Ramanuja, Nimbarka, and Madhva.

It should be clearly recognised that Bharata always

speaks of the association of sattva with the evolution of

Rasa. The different Rasas are only the manifestations of

153

sattva in different forms. In Ch. 7 in the portion following

Sloka 92 (Banaras ed.), Bharata writes,

तच्च समाहितमनस्त्वात् उत्पद्यते । मनःसमाधानाच्च सत्त्वनिवृत्तिरभवति ।

……अत्रोच्यते इह हि नाट्यधर्मप्रबृत्तः सुकृतदुःखकृतो भाव

तथासत्त्ववियुद्धाधिष्ठितः कार्यो यथास्वरूपो भवति । (106)

The sattva is purified, when the mind is self-controlled. The

bhava, giving rise to pleasure and pain, is rooted in the

purified sattva. This concept of visuddha sattva has been

the subject of detailed discussion in the advaita-vadin

analysis of Pancaratra, Vaikhanasa, Ramanuja, Nimbarka

as well as Madhva.

In the Samkhya analysis, Sattva corresponds to

matter or dravya. Rajas and Tamas cannot exist separately

from Sattva. They depend on Sattva for their existence.

The relation of Sattva to Rajas or Tamas is thus what it is

between tapya and tāpaka. Tapya is matter ; and tāpaka

approximates to the Aristotelian form. Tapya is the subs-

trate ; tāpaka are its qualities. Tāpaka differentiates the as

yet undifferentiated and unformed matter into definite forms

and shapes. Sringara or Hasa, with their different admixture

of Tamas or Rajas are thus manifestations of the samanya

rasa (See Ch. III).

Caraka in analysing the activation of the Avyakta in

Sarira, I. 18-19, writes,

अव्यक्तादव्यक्ततां याति व्यक्ताव्यक्ततां पुनः ।

रजस्तमोभ्यामाविष्टशकृत् परिवर्तते ॥ (107)

Rajas is the activating agent of the prakriti or

avyakta. Being acted upon by Rajas, the avyakta becomes

vyakta, or the unmanifest becomes manifest. With the

cessation of the work of Sattva, the Being once again

relapses into non-being. Caraka looks at manas as such an

activating agent. In Sarira. I. 20, Caraka writes,

अचेतनं क्रियावच्च मनश्चेतयिता परः ।

युक्तस्य मनसा तस्य निर्दिश्यन्ते विभोः क्रिया: ॥

चेतनान् यत्स्व आत्मा ततः कर्ता निरुच्यते ।

अचेतनत्वाच्च मनः क्रियावदपि नोच्यते ॥ (108)

In Susruta, this manas is both a substance and energy.

In Sarira, I. 4, Susruta writes उभयात्मकं मनः ।

Mind or

Sattva is the bridge which connects pure energy which is

154

atman, and pure matter or prakriti. The Samkhya-sara (ed.

by Hall. p. 5) writes "knowledge of pure spirit" is the

subject of Samkhya. The oldest strata of Samkhya, known

to us recognises this Visuddha prakriti. This prakriti

becomes aprakrita visuddha sattva, because it is unattain-

able in this life. The concept of aprakrita visuddha sattva

has deeply coloured Bharata's Rasa-speculations, and has

played a significant role in the evolution of the schools of

Vedanta.

Caraka's account of Suddha-Sattva in Sarira I. 45-6,

as also in Sarira V. 10-15, should provide a convenient

starting point of this analysis of the basis of Rasa-realisa-

tion. In Sarira I. 45-6, Caraka writes, after speaking at

length on the sources of the Yogin's strength,

इत्यष्टविधमाश्रयंतं योगिनां बलमैश्वरम् ।

शुद्धसत्त्वसमाधीनात् तत् सर्वमुपजायते ॥

मोक्षो रजस्तमोभ्यावृत्तेर्बलवत्तरकर्मसंक्षयात्।

वियोगः कर्मसयोगेऽपुनर्भव उच्यते ॥ 109)

Moksha or liberation is only possible through freedom from

Rajas or Tamas. It remains to be discussed if complete

freedom is ever attainable in Rasa-enjoyment. In Sarira V.

10-15, Caraka writes again,

एतैरविचल सत्‍वं शुद्धध्यु पायैविशुध्यानि।

मृज्यमान इवदर्शयत्स्वैस्तैलचेलकादिभिः ॥

ग्राहामवुदरजोधूमनिहतारमसाववृतम्।

यथाकर्मंडलं भाति भाति सत्त्वं तथामलम् ॥

जलत्यातमति संरुद्ध' तन्‍नु सत्त्वं संबुध्याने ।

शुद्ध: स्थिर: प्रसन्नाचिदीपो दीपाशये यथा ॥

युज्यते शुद्धसत्त्वस्य या शुद्धध्या सत्या वृद्वि प्रकर्षते ।

यथा मिन्र्तियातवलं महामोहमरयं तमः॥ (110)

The Suddha-Sattva of which Caraka speaks, is not

completely purified.. Caraka's use of the word " अविमल "

shows he realises that in this world of ours, Sattva is

always mixed with Rajas or Tamas. In the Patanjala Yoga-

sutra, this concept of Suddha-sattva has again been worked

out at length. In the Vibhuti-pada 55, Patanjala writes :

सत्त्वपुरुषयोः शुद्धिसाम्ये कैवल्यमिति । (111)

155

The Vyasa-Bhasya writes

यदा निद्धूंतरजस्तमोमलं वृद्धिसत्त्वं पुरुषस्यान्यताप्रत्यय मात्राधिकारं

दृग्कलेशवीजं भवति तदा पुरुषस्य शुद्धिसारुत्यमिवपन्नं भवति,

तदा पुरुषस्योपरचित–मोगभावः शुद्धिः, एतस्यामवस्यायां कैवल्यं

भवति .....। (112)

Buddhi-Sattva is purified from the taints of Rajas and Tamas. This state is called Visuddha-Sattva, a concept which was to influence in a remarkable way the later speculations of the Vedantins.

VI

At creation, from the tamas mahat appears ; from mahat ahamkara or bhutadi. From Sattvic ahamkara arise the eleven senses ; from the tamasa the five tanmatras, or five elements, and Rajasahamkara helps both these processes (Sarvarthasiddhi i, 11). From ahamkara comes the subtle element of sound and then akasa ; from akasa, comes the subtle element of touch, and then air, and so on for the other elements also. From the qualities of sound, touch, etc., we infer corresponding substances. Sound is in all the elements. Like Patanjali, the Visistadvaita of Ramanuja holds that the development of prakriti is caused and controlled by Iswara (Sarvathasiddhi, i. 16).

Ramanuja says that Prakriti or matter, Kāla or time, and Suddha-tattva or pure matter, are the three non-conscious substances. They are objects of experience (bhogya), liable to changes and indifferent to the ends of man. (Sarva-darsana-Samgraha, iv.). The existence of prakriti is not an object of perception or of inference. It is accepted on the authority of the scripture (Tattva-muktakalapa. i. 11). Its three qualities of Sattva, Rajas and Tamas are evolved in it at the time of world-creation. Kāla or time is given an independent place, as in Patanjala speculations.

The Panca-ratrins are never tired of expounding the peculiar character of Vaikuntha-dham, placed far above the prakriti, and made of visuddha-sattva. Ramanuja in his Gadya-traya in the chapter on “Sri-Vaikuntha-Gadya” has described in detail the beautiful nature of Vaikuntha.

The three cardinal principles, accepted by the Sree

23 (OP 179)

156

sect, are the cit, the a-cit and Iswara. Of these three, Iswara

is the principal or angi, the two others being his attributes

or anga. Iswara is always qualived by cit and a-cit. This

cit and a-cit at the moment of creation, are sthula or gross ;

at the moment of destruction, these become suksma or of a

subtle nature. The cit is atman, distinct from the body, self-

revealing, of the nature of ananda, or naturally well-dis-

posed, eternal, unmanifest or beyond the reach of the senses,

unthinkable (a-cintya), always of the same nature, and with-

out any change. The atman, even though it is of the nature

of jnana, is the reservoir of all jnana ; it is the jnata or the

Omniscient. It is yet controlled by Iswara, and is only

limited by Him, and is His own self. Even though it is

atomic, the knowledge of the atman is all-pervasive ; so

there is no hindrance to its enjoyment. Kriya and bhoga

being only varieties of jnana or knowledge, the atman is

the karta and the bhokta, the moment it becomes jnata. But

the activity of the jiva is essentially dependent on Iswara.

The kriya or the activity of the jiva, if it were to evolve out

of the stage of jnana, must first be permitted by Iswara.

The primary swatantra-sakti of the jiva is granted to him

by God. So his freedom is also controlled by Him. The

highest realisation of the jiva lies in this swatantra sakti.

The swatantra sakti is best manifest when he serves Him

best.

The followers of Ramanuja recognise three different

kinds of jada padartha. These are suddha-sattva, misra-

sattva, and kala. There is no trace of rajas and tamas in the

suddha-sattva. This explains how it is the source of all

knowledge and delight, and is ever pure. This sattva at the

wish of the Lord, gets transformed and assumes the form

and shape of all things in the abode of eternal bliss. The

Vaikuntha dhama, the arches and the portals of this heaven,

the bodies of all nitya-mukta jivas and even of the Lord

Himself, are made up of this pure material, the visuddha-

sattva.

While prakriti has the three qualities of Sattva, Rajas

and Tamas, Suddhasattva has only Sattva. When creation

takes place on account of the will of the Lord, subtle matter

becomes gross and souls enter into connection with material

bodies, corresponding to the degree of merit or demerit

acquired by them in previous forms of existence. This

mediation between soul and material bodies is effected by

Lakshmi, who is of the nature of Suddha-sattva. Sree or

157

Lakshmi is the connecting link between the realms of Iswara and the mundane world of jiva. This is done out of love and affection. Lakshmi is compassionate, and is always looking after our well-being. She is "Karunagra-nata mukhi" ; she has been called "Karunam Vedantaram", in Asta-uttara-sahasranama. She is in the realm of Iswara ; yet her gaze is fixed on the sufferings of her sons, the unemancipated men of this world. She is trying to direct the men of this world to God, by her love and compassion. She being Brahma-vidya incarnate, is removing the darkness of ajana. She is protecting man from the snares of maya. Once again, she being one with Visnu, is trying to win the favour of Parameswara for jivas. She asks Him to be compassionate to poor suffering creatures. The cherished aim of Vaisnava faith has always been to enjoy Brahmananda as mukta-jivas. They have always emphasized that their ideal is to enjoy this ananda or bliss in mortal bodies, and not to be lost in perfect identification with Him. Their creed has been to "taste sweet, but not to be turned into sweetness itself, when enjoyment will cease". The dependence on Lakshmi thus became the cardinal point in Vaisnava religious faith.

Ramanuja at the beginning of "Gadya-traya" seeks the help of Lakshmi in propitiating Lord Narayana. Venkatana-tha in his Commentary on this Gadyatraya writes, the reason why men seek the help of Lakshmi is that "She will help men cross the sea of gunas quickly and at ease". This Lakshmi is yajna-vidya, maha-vidya, guhya-vidya and atma-vidya. Sree is the giver of knowledge and liberation. Visnu can never be without Lakshmi, just as Lakshmi can never be without the Lord. They are dependent on each other on account of the perfect harmony reached between the two.

तदेतत् सूक्ष्ममिश्रं परमप्यविच्छित्तम् ।

आदावन्योन्य मिश्रत्वादन्योन्य प्रतिपादकम् ॥

(cited in Venkata-bhasya)

The goddess of Ramanuja with all her beauty, qualities, excellence and wealth, is the ideal wife of Visnu. Ramya-Yamatree discusses in "Tattva-dipa" where to place Lakhsmi in the hierarchy of being. He places Her in the category of Jivas, because of Her atomic nature (cited in Venkata-bhasya). But later Vaisnavas do not subscribe to this atomic nature of Lakhsmi. Like Visnu, she is also of the nature of God. She being endowed with consciousness, is

~ 158

different from unconscious matter, or acit. On account of

her pervasiveness, she is again different from the jiva. The

diverse manifestation of Oneself in the form of the Universe,

and the withdrawal of this manifested appearance into Him-

self once again-this is what is known as lila. There had

been little attempt up to the time of Ramanuja to find any

connection between this lila and Swarupa-bhuta Sakti. Visnu

manifests Himself in both bhoga and lila. The Sree sect

developed this concept of lila centering round Lakshmi.

This lila manifests itself in the forms of different Rasas and

bhavás. It is mugdha-lila as well as vidagdha-lila. It is the

lila' of the Supreme Lord, by which He looks at His dearest

wife. This lila centres round Lakshmi. She is of the nature

of Visudha-sattva, so that Rasas and bhavas become the

manifestation of the purified sattva of Sree. Yamunacharyya

in "Sree-stotra-ratna", 44 writes,

अपूर्वनानारसभावनिर्मय-

प्रबुद्धया मुग्धविदग्धलीलया ।

क्षणसण्युक्ता क्षणपपादिकालया

प्रहर्षयन्त महिषी महाभुजम् ॥ (113)

There is no good discussion available of the nitya-lila

of Rasa Brahma. There is again no good analysis of the

pusti-bhakti of the Vallabhiya sect, or bhakti mixed with

raga of the Gaudiya sect, or bhakti mixed with prema of

other sects. The raga bhakti has flown through diverse

channels. The mahasukhavada doctrine of the Buddhist

Vajrayana (See Ch. X), or the doctrines of the Sahaja-yana

and the Baul Sampradaya about the nature of Rasa, or the

Rasa-sadhana of the Kaula Sampradaya (See Ch. IX) are all

different ramifications of this raga bhakti. The Tantric

siddhacharyyas of the middle ages contributed in no small

measure to the development of the doctrine of Rasa. The

doctrine of Rasa has been developed in different directions

for more than a thousand years; and all the provinces of

India, irrespective of geographical frontiers, have taken a

part in it.

The nitya-brindaban, or the Vaikuntha, which occupies

such a prominent place in the speculations of the different

Vaisnava sects, is only the result of the manifestation of

the infinite sakti of Bhagavan. The infinite sakti of Bhagavan

leads to infinite bhavás. His lila and His dharma are all end-

159

less and infinite. The līla itself is infinitely diversified. The

Srutis speak of the divine city of Ayodhya --"devanam

poorayodhya". They also sometimes speak of "eternal Jeru-

salem" in the West*1. The truth seems to be that one must

get rid of abhimana or attachment to physical body (prakrita

deha) in order to get a glimpse of this noumenal world. This

noumenal world, placed far above the prakriti charged with

the three gunas, is known in Samkhya as the "prakrita kala"

The parinama due to kāla (kāla pacati bhutāni)*2 is held in

check. The visuddha-sattva is the constituent of this nitya-

dhama. It undergoes no parinama due to the influence of

kāla. It can undergo parinama only at the wish of Iswara,

working for the fulfilment of the wishes of the devotee, or

at the wish of the devotee, working for the fulfilment of the

wishes of the Lord, or due to the sheer playfulness (līlā) of

the Mahasakti.

There is a deep core of truth in Bharata's demand that

Rasa realisation is only for the sumanassa preksaka. The

ultimate reality manifests itself at its own sweet will.

Svecchaya sva-bhittan viswamunmeelayati. He enjoys ; He

Himself is being enjoyed. He is the upadana ; He is the

nimitta. He is the upadeya. He does not depend on a second

for subsistence. The spectator and the actor are one and the

same. The spectator again is no passive spectator. Bharata's

demand that the spectator must at once be sumanassa and

preksaka is only intelligible when it is remembered that

both are manifestations of the visuddha-sattva.

This concept of visuddha-sattva has again been worked

out at great length in the Pancaratra. The first phase of the

manifestation of Lakshmi is called Suddha-sristi, "pure

creation" or gunonmesadasa, that is the stage (following the

waveless stage) in which the attributes (gunas) of God make

their appearance. These gunas are aprakrita, "not belonging

to Nature" for Nature does not exist as yet—and have

consequently nothing to do with the three well-known Gunas

(Sattva, Rajas and Tamas) ; that is to say ; the old dogma

that God is necessarily "free from (the three gunas)", i.e.

nirguna, does not exclude His possessing the six ideal

Gunas, which, on the contrary must be ascribed to Him,

because without them there could be no Pure Creation, and

*1 Romans, V. 18-21 ; Romans, VI. 9-11.

*2 Bharata has probably this paka in mind, when he compares Rasa-

realisation with the preparation of soups and drinks.

160

all further evolution depending thereon, no creation at all. However, the evolution of the Gunas does not in any way affect the being or essence of God, it being merely concerned with His "becoming" or "manifestation", that is : His Sakti : "Through the three pairs of what are called the Six Gunas (Sadguna) ; the six Gunas are jnana, aisvarya, sakti, bala, virya, and tejas."

The six Gunas are the material, or instruments, as it were, of Pure Creation, (1) in their totality, and (2) by pairs, in the following way : The Gunas as connected partly with the Bhuti and partly with the Kriya sakti are regarded as falling into two sets, namely Gunas 1 to 3, and Gunas 4 to 6, called respectively "visrama-bhumayah" or "stages of rest" and "srama-bhumayah" or "stages of effort" (Lakshmi - Tantra IV. 24 ; II. 46-47 ; III. 4), and the corresponding gunas of each set (1 and 4, 2 and 5, 3 and 6) join to form a pair, connected with some special divine manifestation.

The Pancaratra in pairing the Gunas was guided by the consideration, that in each pair there should be "bhuti" and "kriya", a stage of rest as well as a stage of effort. There is divine manifestation, but it would have been undifferentiated, and as such unknown, if it has been only bhuti. But such unmanifest bhuti is being made manifest to us, because there is along with it, the activity of kriya sakti. The two together make diversified luminosity, accessible to human sense and knowledge.

The Pancaratra teaches a chain, as it were, of emanations ; each emanation except the first, originating from an anterior emanation ; and thus the favourite image of the process has, with the Pancaratins, become that of one flame, proceeding from another flame. The first three (or including four) beings thus coming into existence are called Vasudeva, four) beings thus coming into existence are called Vasudeva, Vyuhas. This word, as suggested by Schrader, is a combination of the root uh "to shove" and the preposition vi "asunder", and apparently refers to the "shoving asunder" of the six Gunas into three pairs. "This however, does not mean that each Vyuha has only its two respective gunas, but as, is repeatedly emphasized, each Vyuha is Visnu himself, with his six Gunas, of which however, two only, in each case, become manifest.

The Pancaratra Agamas accept the theory of Vyuhas or manifestations. The one Absolute identified with Visnu exists in five different modes, images and the like (arca), incarnations (vibhavs), manifestations (Vyuha) like Vasu-

161

deva, Samkarsana, Pradyumna and Aniruddha, the subtle (Suksma) form of Vasudeva or the Supreme Spirit and the inner ruler of all. Sometimes the highest mode (parā) is said to be Narayana or Brahman, living in Vaikuntha, where God is said to exist in a body made of pure Sattva. God in his infinite fullness, transcends his own manifestations. In Vaikuntha, the Lord is seated on the Serpent Sesa, supported by his consort Lakshmi. Lakshmi, the imaginative symbol of the creative energy of God, becomes in later Vaisnavism, the divine mother of the universe, who sometimes intercedes with God on behalf of weak and erring humanity. While Iswara symbolises justice, Lakshmi stands of mercy, and the two qualities are united in the godhead. Lakshmi, the Sakti of Visnu, has the two forms of kriya or the principle of regulation and control, and bhuti or the principle of becoming. These answering to force and matter, enable Visnu to become the efficient and material causes of the universe.

The four stages of evolution in the Panca-ratra are known as Vasudeva, Samkarsana, Pradyumna and Aniruddha (Padma-tantra. I. 2. 21). The Vasudeva vyuha is the first awakening or gunonmesa of the self of Visnu in the form of Parabrahma. This is the first manifestation of Visnu from the avyakta stage. The Paratattva is Para-Vasudeva, who gives rise to Vyuha Vasudeva. One portion of Para-Vasudeva becomes Vyuha Vasudeva, while the rest is the form of Narayana (Introduction to Panca-ratra—Schrader. p. 52). This Vasudeva-tattva is the first manifestation of Visnu-sakti. This Visnu-sakti carries on everything in the universe ; and hence, she is known as Visva-prakriti. So Lord Vasudeva is the universal Prakriti. But this prakriti, as opposed to ordinary prakriti, is visuddha-sattva prakriti : it is not charged with the three gunas, sattva, rajas and tamas. There is no evolution of gunas at this stage. The first differentiation of sakti and saktiman is thus known as the Vasudeva-tattva. The Lord Vasudeva wishes to create, and gets Himself divided. This self-division of Vasudeva makes possible the emergency of the next vyuha, Samkarsana (Ahirbudhnya. 5. 29-30). The emergence of Samkarsana from Vasudeva is beautifully expressed by some examples. This is a stage, when the sun has not yet risen, but the halo of the sun is visible on the distant horizons. Lord Vasudeva has not unfolded Himself clearly in manifest creations. But the halo of the rays of creation is encircling Him (Ahirbudhnya. 5. 30-31). This is the Samkarsana tattva. Creation is as yet

162

unmanifest ; it is still in a germinal form. There is as yet

no differentiation between cit and cit, or a-cit and a-cit, or

again between cit and a-cit. The infinite universe, which is

both cit and a-cit, suddha and a-suddha, lies unmanifest

in the body of Samkarsana.

The Pradyumna vyuha takes its origin from the

Samkarsana. It is at this stage that there is a split for the

first time between Purusa and Prakriti. Prakriti charged

with the three gunas, sattva, rajas and tamas, becomes for

the first time, manifest at this stage. The evolution of

Prakriti, and the cycle of creation, described in the Panca-

ratra, generally follow the Samkhya scheme. Pradyumna

gives rise to Aniruddha. Aniruddha takes over the charge,

as if, from Pradyumna and brings it to a successful com-

pletion. He creates jada and cit with the help of kāla, and

becomes the Lord of the Universe.

Vasudeva is Lord Bhagavan, endowed with all six

gunas. In Samkarsana, jnana and bala manifest themselves.

There are manifestations of aisvaryya and viryya in

Pradyumna, and sakti and tejas in Aniruddha. Again,

Pradyumna is the lord of creation (sristi), Aniruddha of

maintenance (sthiti) and Samkarsama of destruction (laya).

Again, Samkarsana ' is the presiding deity of body,

Pradyumna of manas or buddhi-tattva, and Aniruddha of

ahamkara-tattva.

Lakshmi is the loving mother, bringing together the

indifferent father, Visnu, who though possessing all six

Gunas, is yet beyond them all, and the jivas, who misled

by avidya, do not know the providence and wisdom of God.

What little the jivas know, is very often misrepresented.

It is the work of Mother Lakshmi to bring the angry or

indifferent father and the erring child together. Venkat-

natha in his commentary on Yamunacharyya's Catu-sloki,

writes,

अस्ति कर्माहिफलदे पतौ कृतादरं श्रियः |

निग्रहादार्ण काले अन्यूक्षणमनुग्रहै ॥

Sri-devi has two purposes : to intercede with the Lord

not to punish, and then to ask Him to be favourably dis-

posed to the erring child. The opinion of Visnu-citta is

also cited in this connection. He says that everyone seeks

the help of Sri, who is mother to us all. The mother cares

not so much for the good, as for what is dear to the child ;

the father cares for both. So the father punishes ; while

the mother implores the father not to do it. Lakshmi also

punishes the wrong doer. Ravana perished in Sita’s anger.

The goddess Lakshmi has been variously called

“प्रणिपात-प्रसन्ना”, “क्षिप्र प्रसादिनी देवी”। She is “क्षान्तरूपिणी, क्षमा-

रूपिनो, अनुग्रहपया, अनन्ता 1” (114) She is always

protecting man against evil. All the wealth of Indra and

Brahma is at her disposal. The lord Visnu dearly loves

Lakshmi ; so also is Lakshmi devoted to her Lord. The

two are always looking at each other ; they have reached a

perfect understanding and harmony between them. The

Catu-sloka calls this harmony and understanding Sama-

rasya (sloka. 3). It will be seen later on how this Sama-

rasya is the secret of Rasa-realisation (See Ch. IX). With-

out her blessing, no worldly good, not to speak of liberation,

can ever be attained. Lokacaryya in his “Sri-vacana” and

Varāvara in his exhaustive commentary on this book, have

given a detailed exposition of the loving intercession of

mother Lakshmi.

It might be objected that if Paramatman be nitya-

mukta, then he has no necessity of conjugal love for

Lakshmi, giving rise to intense pleasure. So the analogy of

Paramatman and Lakshmi as husband and wife, makes no

sense. He delights in Himself ( स्वरमन ) But even if

it be delight in Himself, there is no difficulty in His

dividing Himself as man and woman, and the enjoyment is

still of Himself, though in a different way. So when he

had been together with Rama, He was really centred in

Himself, and not divided into husband and wife. Visnu

has no other object of love ; so the love for Rama means

that Rama has been personified as Rati. Lakshmi also

assumes diverse forms, as does Paramatman. She is Sree,

Bhu, Durga, Hri, Daksina, Sita, Jayanti, Satya. Daksina is

the best among all these forms, for the first enjoyment of

Paramatman must begin with Daksina. Daksina shares first

this blissful union with the Paramatman ; it is the pattern

and culmination of the first divine bliss (Madhva-

Siddhanta-Sara. Nirnaya Sagar Press. p. 23-4). Lakshmi

is without a corporeal body, as the Supreme Lord is with-

out one. (Ibid. Sutra. 72). Brahma, Rudra are all subject

to death and decay. But Lakshmi is beyond the flux of

change, and is aksara. She has a spiritual body. She is

24 (OP 179)

164

thus aprakrita ; and she is the emblem of purified Sattva.

The prakriti has been looked upon in two ways. The one form is jada, subject to change ; the other is changeless

and free. This changeless state, free from all stains, is the Suddha-Sattva, and it is aprakrita, because it is unattain-

able in life. The prakriti has a completely emancipated symbolic form. The Vaikuntha and everything in it, are

constituted of these symbolic triguna and panca-mahabhuta.

The gods and the mukta purusas subsist or decay with the subsistence of these gunas, Visuddha Sattva, Rajas and

Tamas. Everything in the world, the Vyoma and akasa, has this ephemeral as well as idealised forms ; the Vayu, also

has these two forms ; the water also has these two. There is a river in between prakriti and parama-vyoma ; this is

known as Viraja. Everyone who wishes to enter parama-

vyoma, shall have to cross the river; and in crossing it, shall be purified of both Rajas and Tamas. Whatever is

present in prakrita form is also there in an ideational form in a more purified state in Vaikuntha.

Jiva Goswamin in "Bhagavad-Sandharva" writes,

यत्र वैकुण्ठे रजस्तमश्च न प्रवर्त्तते। तत्रैव मिश्रं सहचरं यत् सत्त्वं

तद्वापि न किन्तु अन्यदेव तस्य या सुप्रज्ञाप्रतिबिम्बमान । मायातः परा

भगवन्नुरूपशक्तिरसस्य वृत्तिवैन चिद्रूपं शुद्धसत्त्वाश्रयं सत्त्वमिति तदोय

प्रकरण एव ज्ञायिष्यते ।

(Sec. 49). In Vaikuntha, there are no Rajas or Tamas. There is not even Sattva, which in its substantial form, is to be

acted on by them. But here there is another kind of Sattva.

This is of the nature of knowledge and is known as the Suddha-Sattva. In Narada-pancaratra, says Jiva Goswamin,

there is Vaikuntha-loka, constituted of six gunas and free from the three gunas, Sattva, Rajas and Tamas, and those

who are not Vaisnavas cannot enter there.

लोकं वैकुण्ठनामानं दिव्यषड्गुणसंयुतम्॥

अवैष्णवानामप्राप्यं गुणत्रयविवर्जितम्॥

Jiva Goswamin, says further in the Uttara-Khande of Padma-Purana, the aprakrita character of Visuddha-Sattva

in Vaikuntha has been clearly specified. This Vaikuntha is to be reached by crossing the river Viraja, where one

sheds the last traces of Raja and Tamas. This world accord-

ing to Jiva Goswamin, is everlasting, deathless, changeless and not subject to any limitation, and is full of Suddha-

Sattva.

165

तस्याः पारे परब्रह्मन्न त्रिप्राकारभूतं सनातनम् ||

अमृतं शाश्वतं नित्यमनन्तं परमं पदम् ।

शुद्धसत्त्वमयं दिव्यमक्षरं ब्रह्माहः पदम् (50)

In Sec. 51, it is emphasized that Vaikuntha being without any aprakrita Sattva, is full of Sacchidananda ; or in other words, here truth, knowledge and delight have come to a perfect balance and harmony (51). In explaining how it is that the Suddha-Sattva is made manifest to us, Jiva Goswamin says that Suddha-Sattva is self-expressive, and is identified with a determined form (62). There is no trace of Rajas and Tamas in this Visuddha-Sattva, which constitutes the body of God.

अन्यस्य रजस्तमोभ्याममिश्रस्यापि प्राकृतत्वेन जाम्यांश समवलिततत्त्वान्न

विशेषेण शुद्धतत्त्वम् ।

This Visuddha Sattva being self-expressive and self-illuminated, is without a trace of affection, which is either Rajas or Tamas. The Lord assumes this form only to direct the devoted prayers of the worshippers and this is His manifest purpose.

In Bhagavad-Sandharva. 66, Jiva Goswamin writes how the Supreme Being cannot be without this aprakrita Visuddha-Sattva. प्राकृतगुण प्रकाशेऽर्भवान केवलमनुमीयते नतु साक्षात् क्रियत इत्यर्थः । With Prakrita gunas, there can only be अनुमान, and no direct apprehension. Rasa-svadam can not be the result of anumana, as has been firmly established by Abhinavagupta, while criticising the standpoint of Sri Sankuka. Rasa enjoyment is the result of direct apprehension ; and this can only be done, according to Jiva Goswamin (Sec. 66), when the Visuddha-Sattva, freed from all vijnana and ajnana, is reflected in our consciousness. It should also be noted that Abhinavagupta holds that Parama Siva can only be made perceptible when it seeks the help of sakti, in the form of bindu (See Ch. V.).

In Sec. 84, Jiva Goswamin further elucidates the concept, He says that Brahman is both sat and asat. He is sat, because the wide world and all Karyas are His manifestations. He is asat in the sense, He is the first cause and extremely subtle, and of the nature of Karana. The Svarupavaibhava is placed beyond both these vaibhavavas or manifestations, and is of the nature of suddha-sattva, and its abode is in Sri Vaikuntha. Jiva Goswamin says further

166

how all avenues of jnana, kriya, artha and phala are brought

to a final balance in this Visuddha-Sattva, which transcends

both Sat and Asat, Sthula, and Shukshama, and indeed is a

perfect balance of everything. This standpoint is strikingly

similar to the Platonic idea of Good, where all oppositions

are resolved, and everything has been harmoniously blend-

ed into a perfect concord.

Souls and matter are not kept separate in Ramanuja

as they are kept in orthodox Samkhya, but are compre-

hended within the unity of the Lord's essence, and are

related to the Supreme as attribute to a substance, as parts

to a whole, or as body to the soul, which animates it. They

are also called prakaras or modes, Sesas or accessories,

niyama or the controlled, while God is the supporter

(prakari), controller (niyanta) and the principal (Sesi).

They are real and permanent, though subject to the control

of the one Brahman in all their modifications and evolutions.

If souls and matter are attributes of God, it does not mean

that they are not in themselves substances possessing

attributes, with their own distinct modes, energies, and

activities. The illustration of the soul and body points out

that the body has its own qualities, though it qualifies the

soul. In Ramanuja's philosophy, the soul is never without

traces of its bodily existence, and the body is never with-

out a soul. So the soul always sharing in things which are

non-soul, is of the nature of aprakrita visuddha-sattva. This

hypothesis enables Ramanuja to account for the harmony

of the universe, and the interaction of the reals, so as to

form one world. The world is one on account of the

Supreme mind, which gives organic connection to the

multiplicity of spiritual reals and a place and a function

to each of them. Souls (bhokta), matter (bhogya), and God

(prerita) are three (Svet Up. 1), on account of their natural

differences (Svarupa bheda), but one on account of the

identity (aikyam) of the modes and substance (prakara and

prakari).

Suddha-Sattva is the stuff of the body of God in his

creation of nitya-bibhutí. It does not conceal the nature

within. God reveals Himself as a cosmic force through His

lilavibhuti with the aid of prakriti, and in His transcendental

existence through His nityavibhuti with the aid of Suddha-

tattva. This Vibhuti, or the principle of becoming par

excellence, is the attribute of Lakshmi, so that it appears

that Suddha-Sattva, without an admixture of the other

167

gunas, is the attribute of Visnu. For Suddha-sattva must

seek the assistance of Lakhsmi at the moment of creation.

Pure matter, then, is a sort of spiritual matter, which

exists nowhere except in pure creation.

It is suggested that Rasa and bhavás are nothing but

manifestations of the Suddha-Sattva. These are Vibhuti or

the principle of becoming of the soul, which itself is Being,

and is beyond all flux and change. Bhavás, Rasas and the

Supreme Bliss resulting from an enjoyment by this Suddha-

Sattva, stand in a hierarchy. The splendour falls as we

travel away from the original source. In this process of

withdrawal from the original source, which marks the

beginning of creation, the original is left unchanged. This

process of withdrawal is characterised by the evolution of

a series of pairs of opposites. It has already been seen how

the Six Gunas in the Pancaratra, are not paired together

haphazardly, but by selective affinity, determined by the

absence of one quality in one and its presence in the other.

The view that emanations leave the source of the product

unchanged was again emphasized in the abhasavada doctrine

of Kashmir Saivism, and Abhinavagupta's Rasa-speculations

had better been looked at from this standpoint.

At the beginning of Sec. III, it was said that the con-

cept of Visuddha-Sattva is close to the old Samkhya concept

of Visuddha-prakriti. Rasa and bhavás which are rooted in

Visuddha Sattva, are of the nature of gunas of this primary

stuff, or dravya. Rasa being the most refined guna, is the

first evolute, and is closest to the Visuddha Sattva. Pure

matter is spiritual, that is, "of the nature of knowledge

and Bliss", in so far as it is nowhere an obstacle to the mind,

but consists, on the contrary, of nothing but wishes material-

ised. Rasa being only an attribute of this pure matter, is

thus a state when the mind is free. This freedom from all

attachments, of which Abhinavagupta speaks in Abhinava-

Bharati Vol. I. p. 282-3 (G.O.S.) is liberation from all hin-

drances. This freedom is only attainable when the soul be-

comes of the nature of aprakrita visuddha-sattva.

This concept of Visuddha-sattva is not peculiar to

Pancaratra. It runs throughout the speculations of the

Vedantists, as also through the original exposition of the

Samkhya in Patanjala. In the released condition, the souls

have all the perfections of the Supreme except in two points.

They are atomic in size, while the Supreme Spirit is all-

pervading. Though of atomic size, the soul can enter into

168

several bodies, and experience different worlds created by

the Lord; but it has no power over the creative movements

of the world, which belong exclusively to Brahman.

Madhva in discussing the nature of Suddha-Sattva in

Madhva-Siddhanta-Sara, Sec. 36, writes,

इयं गुणानां विषमावस्थासृष्टिरित्युच्यते ॥ सृष्टिकाले सत्त्वगुणस्यामिश्रत्व-

भावान् । साम्यावस्था तु त्रिगुण इत्यत्प्रकर्षेण ॥ तत्राणामपि गुणानां

प्रयोजनमाह ॥ तत्त्वशुद्धसत्त्वविमिति ॥ (102)

Creation being the result of an unbalance of the different

gunas, with the achievement of this balance, there is an end

to all creations. So what is the nature of activities of one,

who is Suddha Sattva ? Madhva writes,

मुक्ता नैव प्रकृतिदेहं लौलया गृहोतवातदेह न यथेष्ट भोगाननुभूयतदेहं स्वेच्छयैव

त्यजन्ति ।

Such men take on the vesture of clay at their will, enjoy

worldly enjoyment without any sense of attachment, and

renounce these of their own accord. The soul may continue

the bodily existence, so long as its prarabdha-karma is

operative ; but after the prarabdha-karma has run its course,

when it departs from the body, it is freed absolutely. Abso-

lute liberation and embodied life are not compatible. The

author of the Nyayamrita argues that he who has the vision

of the truth, but not the grace of God, necessary to effect

freedom, continues to live in the flesh. This is jivan-mukti.

Complete freedom can be achieved only through the grace

of God, and as such, is unattainable in aesthetic experience.

Among the four Vaisnava sects, Sree, Brahma, Rudra

and Sanaka, the school of Madhva is generally known as

that of the Brahma Sampradaya. The followers of Madhva,

like those of the Sree sect, have accepted Lakshmi. Their

deities are Lakshmi and Narayana. This sect recognises

that there is a super-rational achintya-sakti of Brahman ;

and this is known as अघटित-घटन-पटोयसी ॥ This Sakti of the

Paramatman is known as Lakshmi ; and she is more power-

ful and universal than other Gods (Madhva-Siddhanta-Sara-

Padmanava. Nirnaya Sagar Press p. 13b). Sakti is of four

kinds, (a) achintya sakti, (b) adheya sakti, (c) sahaja sakti and

(d) pada-sakti. Of these four, achintya sakti is perfectly

harmonised with Parameswara. It would be wrong to think

that there cannot be any work done by achintya-sakti in

Parameswara, who Himself is beyond all activities. For He

is the unmoved mover, much like the Aristotelian God. He

169

goes without moving from his original position. He is atomic

in size ; and is at the same time, all-pervasive. All opposi-

tions are resolved in Him. All these are made possible by

the achintya Sakti of the Lord. Rama or Lakshmi represents

this achintya Sakti. But this does not mean that Rama or

Lakshmi exhausts all achintya Sakti, and is its embodiment.

Lakshmi Sakti is infinitely inferior to Paramatma-sakti ;

and Brahma-sakti is again infinitely inferior to Lakshmi

Sakti (Madhva-Siddhanta-Sara Nirnaya Sagar Press. p. 14a).

Again, Vayu, Prithvi and all their gods are infinitesimal

parts of this achintya-sakti (Ibid 14a, and 26b). Though

Lakshmi and Visnu are not identical, both are eternally

free, or नित्यमुक्त (Sutra. 71). This eternal freedom of

Lakshmi is to be attributed to her eternal association with

the Supreme Lord ; अनादिकाले भगवान् सम्वन्धित्वात् युज्यते

नित्यमुक्त त्वं तस्या: । (Vivritti of Sutra. 71). Both are

without a beginning. Both are deathless, true and all-per-

vasive. This goddess Sree is the emancipator ; she is pro-

pitiated, when worshipped with flowers and sandal-wood.

She is the eternal companion of Lord Visnu. She is Chapala,

Ambika and Hri. This unmanifest Sakti is identical and

undifferentiated from Sristi, and exists in eight manifest

forms. She is again of the nature of Cit, and is eternal and

para.

Madhva also holds that Parama-atman is full of infinite

qualities. Each quality is uncircumscribed, and is completely

adequate unto itself. He passes all description ; He cannot

even be conceived. The jnana and ananda of the Paramat-

man far surpass the jnana and ananda of Lakshmi. Each of

His qualities is infinite or ananta. This is His sa-jatiyavantya.

Again, jnana, ananda, bala and sakti being ananta, there is

in Him a vi-jatiyantya.115 All heard and unheard of qualities

are vested in Him. Prakriti is jada. The Lord is very dif-

ferent from jiva, Brahman and even from the Maha-Laksmi.

He has got a body ; He rules over the vast universe. But

His body is not a-nitya, like the jada-deha of the ordinary

jiva. It is of the nature of knowledge, and is aprakrita. So

all His limbs, His head, face, hands and fingers are all of a

spiritual and subtle nature. He is unique, while the jiva is

dependent on others (para-tantra). He is one, for there is

none, who is.His equal. None can attain a similar status with

Him. The jiva is for ever para-tantra. Any attempt to reach

His swa-tantra, or uniqueness is sheer folly.

170

Lakshmi is different from the Paramatman, and is at the same time, under His absolute control. Brahman and all others are the children of Lakshmi. They appear from Her and disappear in Her. Lakshmi is infinitely superior to the muktas in her love, adoration and knowledge (priya, bhakti and jnana) of the Lord. The Madhvas hold that at the time of pralaya, man disappears into Yama, Yama into Sudarsana, Sudarsana into Rudra, Rudra into Brahman, and Brahman Himself into Durga. After the disappearance of Brahman, Durga assumes the form of a wheel. Lakshmi, like her Lord Bhagavan, is nitya-mukta and full of all gunas. But even though she is nitya-mukta and apta-kama, she prays to God. Both Bhagavan and Lakshmi are without any beginning, and eternally free.

The Madhvas find a two-fold division in the nature of Bhagavan. These are jada and a-jada. The jada prakriti is known as avyakta, with its eight-fold division. This is what the Madhvas call a-cit. The a-jada prakriti is on the other hand, of the nature of cit and parā. The cit-prakriti is without any beginning, endless ; she is the consort of Narayana, and the mother of Brahma ; she is Sree. The Paramatman, though He is self-absorbed, out of grace to Lakshmi, enters into Her, and goes on playing as Lakshmi. Sree Bhu, Durga, Hri, Daksina, Sita, Jayanti, Bhirini, Satya, Ruksmini are all different manifestations of Lakshmi. Lakshmi can assume infinite forms and shapes. Among all these infinite varieties, Daksina is the finest and the best. She is seated on the knees of the Lord ; she is the yajna ; she is always enjoying communion, or rati-sukha with Her Lord. She is the first to enjoy this communion. This pleasure is thereafter transmitted to others. Her body is a-prakrita, like that of Her Lord. She is cin-maya and nitya.

The Madhvas hold that the mukta purusas assume out of lila, the suddha-sattva body, and leave it when the enjoyment is over. This body, being without a trace of rajas and tamas, and constituted of pure sattva, there can be no question of attachment from such enjoyment. This is also the highest ideal of Rasa enjoyment, where bhoga is not merely bhoga, but combined with the essence of tyaga (See Chs. IX and XI).

Speaking of bhoga, the Madhvas hold that it is four-fold, sa-lokya, sa-meepya, sa-rupya and sa-jujya.116 The bhoga, which is made possible through entry into the body of the Lord, and enjoyment through such a body, is known as sa-

171

jujya. Only the gods are entitled to sa-jujya enjoyment. The

gods go on enjoying in their own beautiful bodies, as also

by entering into the body of the Lord. Brahman cannot

enjoy except through entering the body of the Paramatman.

But everyone shall have to enter the body of Bhagavan at

the time of the pralaya. At other times, the muktas can at

their own sweet will, come out of Him, and once again re-

enter into Swarupa. They are free. The sa-lokya muktas can

enjoy whatever they may desire from anywhere in the

universe. Some of them attain mukti here in this world.

Others enter swarga, or may enjoy the ksira-samudra, or

the ocean of sweet milk. So also it is the case with sa-

meepya and sa-rupya bhoga. The muktas are not limited in

their choice of the places of enjoyment. There is a detailed

description of this wonderful land, where ksira-sagar, beau-

tiful forests, lakes of wine and seas of nectar abound.

Lord Krishna being of the nature of Sacchidananda,

brings into perfect unison the three qualities, Sat, Cit and

Ananda. The Swarupa Sakti of the Lord is divided into

three qualities. These three are Sandhini, Samvit and

Hladini. In the Visnu-Purana. 1.12.69, these three qualities

are mentioned :

ह्लादिनीसन्धिनी संवित् त्वय्येकै सर्वसंस्थितौ ।

ह्लाद-तापकरो-मिश्रा त्वयि नो गुणवर्जिते ॥

"In you are united hladini, Sandhini and Samvit for

the creation of the world ; but You without a trace of any

guna, are free from all these". By hladini is meant Sattvika

qualities ; by tapakari is meant Tamasa qualities ; and Rajas

represents misra qualities. But the Lord who is free from

the play of gunas, is only the manifestation of His own self

in the forms of Sat, Cit and Ananda. Of these three are

these three Saktis, Sandhini, Samvit and Hladini. By

Sandhini Sakti, the Lord who is Himself of the nature of

Sattva, becomes its manifestation, and also makes others

share in it. This is

सर्वदेशकालद्रव्यादिप्राशिकरी सन्धिनी ।

Again, the Lord who is of the nature of knowledge, becomes

known to Himself, and makes others know Him by Samvit

Sakti. Lastly, the Lord who is of the nature of delight,

comes to delight in Himself, and makes others also delight

in Him by this third power of Hladini. These powers are

25 (OP 179)

172

graduated in order of their superiority ; and hladini stands

highest among these three.

The Lord possesses a self-revealing vritti, latent in this

primary Sakti, which becomes His own self. When the Lord

reveals Himself on account of this self-revealing vritti, it

is known as Visuddha-Sattva. The vritti which is the pro-

duct of Swarupa-Sakti characterised by self-expressiveness,

is known as Sattva

अत्र सत्त्वशब्देन सत्त्वप्रकाशता लक्षणस्वरूपशक्तिवृत्ति विशेष उच्यते ।

It is Visuddha because it is freed from all traces of Maya,

which is trigunatmika. This Visuddha Sattva is not just

Sattva ; it is entirely independent from all other things.

When the Sandhini power predominates it becomes “adhara-

sakti”. When there is dominance of Samvit, it is “atma-

vidya” ; and with excess of hladini, it becomes “guhya-

vidya”. If on the other hand, there is simultaneously the

dominance of all three powers, then it is the “Murti” of

God. The “adhara-sakti” with excess of Sandhini, expresses

the “dharma” of God ; and the murti with equal dominance

of all three powers in Vasudeva ; the Sri Vigraha evolving

out of this Vasudeva, is Vasudeva.

The Lord when He is resting in His own self, is “Rasa-

maya”. The Upanishads identify God with Rasa. The Lord

is Rasa-maya, because the best among his Swarupa-saktis, is

this hladini. There are two functions of this hladini ; first it

is to please God Himself as “hlada” ; the other is to gladden

others, and so to give “hlada” to them. This hladini Sakti

thus extends both to man and God, and is a sort of connect-

ing link between the two. The hladini in Bhagavad-koti,

gladdens the Lord, and makes Him Rasamaya. Again the

hladini entering into Jiva-koti, fills the heart of the devotees

with the purest delight. The delight of devotion on the part

of the devotees, and the delight of Creation or “lila” on the

part of the Lord—are the manifestations of the same hladini

power in two distinct spheres. The hladini in the Lord is of

the nature of Rasa ; the hladini in the devotee, is of the

nature of bhakti. The presence of Radha in Lord Krishna,

who Himself is full and complete in Himself, is in the form

of eternal hladini-power. The Jivas would be filled with

intense delight, if they had even a glimpse of it.

The Vaikhanasa and the Nimbarka branches of Vedanta

also emphasize this concept of Visuddha-Sattva. The inani-

mate world, according to Nimbarka, has three principal

173

categories (tattvas) which are (1) aprakrita, or what in Ramanuja has been called, the stuff out of which the non-natural (aprakrita) bodies of God, the angels, and the liberated souls are made, (2) prakriti with its three gunas, and (3) Kala or time. The aprakrita Visuddha Sattva is underived from the primordial prakriti. Rasa and Bhavas are thus to be traced as qualities of the aprakrita visuddha sattva ; they are only manifestations of this primary stuff, whose real nature is revealed only to saints and gods.

Nimbarka wrote a short commentary on the Brahma Sutra called, "Vedanta-parijata-saurabha" as well as ten verses, Dasasloki, elucidating his view of the distinctness of Jiva, Iswara and Jagat. His commentary on the Brahma-Sutra develops the theory of transformation (parinama) of Brahman. Nimbarka draws a distinction between the independent reality of Purusottama and the dependent realities of Jiva and prakriti. While Jiva and prakriti are dependent on Purusotama, they are realities all the same. The relation of the three principles of jiva, the world and God, is not one of absolute identity or non-distinction, since such a view would contradict numberless passages of the Upanishads, which insist on difference, and will also involve confusion between the natures and attributes of the different principles. Nor can it be said that the three principles are absolutely distinct, since this would be to fly in the face of the monistic evidence of the Upanishads. Nimbarka concludes that both difference and non-difference are real. The soul and the world are different from Brahman, since they possess natures and attributes different from those of Brahman. They are not different, since they cannot exist by themselves, and depend absolutely on Brahman. The difference signifies distinct and dependent existence (para-tantra sattabhavah), and non-difference signifies the impossibility of independent existence (svatantrya satta bhavah). Nimbarka holds that the sakti of Brahman is the material cause of the world, and the changes of sakti do not touch the integrity of Brahman. What Ramanuja calls the "body" of Brahman is the Sakti of Nimbarka.

According to Nimbarka, the acit-tattva may assume three different forms. These may be of prakrita or of an aprakrita nature, and the third is kala. The sub-strate which is being operated upon by the three gunas, is of a prakrita nature. This prakrita dravya as karana, is nitya ; but as

174

karya, this is a-nitya. Pradhana, Maya, Avyakta are all different denotations of this karana avastha ; and all the stages from mahat-tattva to the universe as manifest creation are included under karya (See also Ch. III). The a-cit is not self-existent ; it depends for its existence on the will of God. Prakriti is under the sway of Kala. Prakriti contributes to the bondage, and stands in the way of liberation of the jiva. It gets itself transformed into deha, indriya, manas and buddhi of the atman with the help of the three gunas, sattva, rajas and tamas. The prakrita portion of the acit-tattva is this visuddha-sattva. But even though it is a-cetana, it is very different from prakriti and kala. It is resplendent as the sun, and is placed outside the rule of the prakriti. It should be remembered further that nitya-bibhuti, visnu-pada, parama-vyoma, parama-pada are only different names of this aprakrita portion of the acit-tattva.

It is controlled by the Lord. It assumes different forms, and pleases Him and His disciples. It is beyond the domain of Kala, and is changeless, without any parinama. Kala is ever present and comprehends everything else.

According to Nimbarka, the lordship over the universe, and its control are all vested in the Brahma. Sree Krishna or Vasudeva is this Para-Brahma. He is without any defect, the source of all that is good, of the nature of the true and the wise, without any limitation, and the embodiment of Sacchidananda. His powers cannot be comprehended in thought. He is at the same time, the beloved of the Gopis, and the lord of Rama. Gopi presides over prema ; Rama or Laksmi is the goddess of wealth. So the Lord is the source of all wealth, just as He is the root of all madhurya or bliss. What the Puranas describe as Satya-bhama is this Rama or Bhu-sakti. The body of the Lord is endowed with an infinite variety of benevolent qualities. It is wonderfully beautiful, tender, full of grace and sweet-scenting, full of charm and youth. It is no use finding out the presence of the different indriyas in Him, because He is all-powerful, and essentially one. Those liberated or mukta purusas, who have arrived very near to God, and those others, who are nitya, are all possessed of similar qualities. The constitution of their bodies, being dependent on the eternal and un-limited wishes of the Lord, is without death or decay. Their bodies are nitya, or without any change, just as souls are nitya. This nitya-deha is shrouded, when the jiva is in bondage. But when the jiva out of the grace of the Lord,

gets a glimpse of Him, he becomes detached from the prakriti, and comes to acquire his ever-lasting, deathless body. At the moment of entrance into this heavenly kingdom, the Lord grants the jiva this eternal, deathless and changeless body, with which to worship Him.

But it should not be forgotten that in Ramanuja's speculations, as also in Nimbarka, it is clearly held that though this visuddha-sattva comes under a-cit or jada-tattva, it is being always penetrated by cit, without which the existence of the a-cit visuddha-sattva would itself become an impossibility. Visuddha-sattva in Ramanuja and Nimbarka, at the behest of the Lord, who Himself is of the nature of cit, undergoes various transformations. This standpoint, where the a-cit is penetrated by cit, is not very different from the standpoint in Madhya, which looks at visuddha-sattva itself as cit. So from both standpoints, Rasa-realisation is an activity of the cit-sakti.

It should be noted again that the sakti which occupies such an important place in Ramanuja and Nimbarka, assumes the form of Prakriti in early Samkhya speculations. The Ahirbudhna Samhita (xiii. 18-30), which gives a summary of the Sasti-tantra, perhaps refers to Sakti, when it speaks of Prakriti, which is held to be the store-house of energy. The term is also referred to here and there in the Ahirbudhna, but it is difficult to ascertain the exact sense in which it is used. In ii. 57, it is defined as the material cause of the universe (jagat-prakriti-bhāvo ya sa sakti pari-kirtitā), and in the hemistich vi. 16 (yat tat gunamayam rupam sakte-stasyā prakirtitam),117 the term evidently speaks of prakriti, which is held to be the conglomeration of the gunas.

Nimbarka says that the Supreme Spirit is conceived as free from all defects. By defects, Nimbarka obviously means all that results from the activities of Rajas and Tamas. This Supreme Spirit is the storehouse of all beneficient attributes, possessed of a heavenly body (suddhā-sattva), full of beauty and tenderness, sweetness and charm (Dasasloki, 4). Liberation according to Nimbarka, is not complete identification with God, which is an impossibility. At the moment when he is freed from all limitations, he comes to approximate the aprakrita visuddha Sattva. Rasas and bhavas are possible only when such an approximation is sufficiently close. Nimbarka accepts Lord Krishna as the Supreme Lord, or parama Brahma. The Sakti of this Supreme Lord as

176

analysed by Nimbarka in his Vedanta-parijata-saurabha is

very similar to the analysis of Ramanuja. The followers of

Nimbarka speak of Lord Krishna as "Ramapati" "Sripati" ;

but they hold Radhika, who is seated on the left side of

Lord Krishna, and who is the fountain-head of "prema" or

love, as even better than Him. In the fifth sloka of

Nimbarka's Dasa-sloki, we come across,

अद्धे तु वामे वृषभानुजा सदा ।

विराजमानमनुरूपसौम्यगाम् ॥

रसोत्सवस्यैः परिषेवितां सदा ।

स्मरेम देवीं सकलेष्टकामदाम् ॥ (118)

Purushottamacharyya in his commentary Vedanta-

ratna -manjusa, written on Dasasloki, explains the qualities

of Radhika, "anurupa-saubhaga", "devi", "Sakalestaka-

mada" much on the lines of Yamunacharyya's Catu-sloki, or

the exposition of Venkatanatha of Ramanuja's concept of

Lakshmi in "Gadya-traya". Radha in Nimbarka is the

anapayini Sakti of Visnu in the Panca-ratra or in the

Puranas. All these different branches of Vedanta emphasize

that the non-attachment and bliss in aesthetic enjoyment can

only be explained, if Rasa-realisation be looked upon as

manifestation of this aprakrita Visuddha Sattva.

It must have been noticed further that it was possible

for the Rasa-vadins to change their philosophic position from

the one, held by their master, simply because both Bharata

and his interpretors, though belonging to different philo-

sophic traditions, upheld the doctrine of sakti, in the form of

visuddha-sattva. Bharata as a disciple of the Samkhya-

Patanjala school (See Ch. VI) and the Vedantists as also the

Pratyabhijna exponents, like Abhinavagupta, were unan-

imous that Rasa-enjoyment is essentially the result of a deep

embrace with sakti. The philosophy of Sakti thus bridged

the gulf between Bharata and the later exponents of Rasa,

who are almost all of them Vedantists.

The Samkhya-Patanjala standpoint in relation to Rasa

enjoyment, speaks of this concept of Sakti, when it refers

to parinama, as affecting all stages of evolution. Evolution,

according to the Samkhya system, is the gradual develop-

ment of what existed inherently within the primary cause in

a diffused state. It is the process which makes the under-

developed or less developed one more developed, the inte-

177

grated or the less differentiated one more differentiated. It

should be remembered that Bharata also refers to the role

of Sakti in Rasa-enjoyment, when he speaks of the distinc-

tive flavours of each of the different ingredients, which enter

into the making of a soup or drink.* The concept of

visuddha-sattva in Bharata once again indicates his aware-

ness of the role of sakti in Rasa enjoyment. The Vedantists,

like Ramanuja, Nimbarka and Madhva were doing little else

than emphasize the concept of sakti, when they gave to

visuddha-sattva a prominent place in their philosophic

scheme.

Vallabhacharyya speaks of the noumenal kingdom of

.Bhagavan, like Vaikuntha and others. Everything in this

kingdom is aprakrita and nitya. Vallabha holds that the

jivatman is atomic in size, a part of the Brahman, and is

non-different from Him. This atomic portion, full of sat,

cit and ananda, issues out of the aksara Brahman, just as

sparks of fire issue out of the burning fire-place. As these

sparks separate out of the common source, there is out of

the grace of God, in each part, preponderance of Sattva.

There is simultaneously a disappearance of the ananda

portion. The aiswarryas disappear thereafter. The jiva may

be atomic ; but at the moment when he is possessed of by

God, or when there is the emergence of ananda, divine

qualities like comprehension and extension appear. But even

then the comprehension and extension of the jiva are not

established independently. Comprehension or extension

being inter-related to anandamsa may only make its appear-

ance in the cid-amsa.

The followers of Vallabha speak of Para-brahma as the

seat of perennial delight, and invested with all aprakrita

dharmas. He is Sree Krisna, also known as Purusottama ;

all the alaukika qualities are ever present in Him ; all His

lilas are nitya.

The Vallabhiyas hold further that just as there is an

aprakrita visuddha-sattva, very different from the prakrita

sattva, so there are aprakrita rajas and aprakrita tamas.

The Visuddha sattva, when it assumes a shape for the main-

tenance of the universe, is known as Visnu. So when the

Lord takes the form of Visuddha rajas, there is Brahma ;

and when the Lord takes the shape of aprakrita visuddha

tamas, there is Siva. Though they are all aprakrita deities,

• Vide Ch. I.

178

they are known as "sa-guna", because they control the three prakrita gunas.

The way advocated by Vallabhacharyya is also known as the pusti-marga. The anugraha or kripa of God is known as pusti. Ordinarily, all jivas are not entitled to lila-pravesa. At the beginning, out of the "anugraha" of the Lord, the jiva gets Brahma-bhava. After that, there is the "parama anugraha" of the Lord. This is called "barana" by His own rupa. Anugraha liberates the jiva, and gives mukti. This is attainable by all. But parama anugraha leads to bhakti. This is extremely rare. The anugraha or kripa of the Lord resists the ravages of time. Various results, both laukika and a-laukika, flow from it. One can find out the presence of anugraha or pusti by looking at the result. The removal of great obstructing influences, and the establishment of God's kingdom are known as Maha-pusti. In actual practice, karma and obstacles arising out of swa-bhava are the most difficult to be overcome. To take the case of Indra, it should be remembered that Indra killed Viswa-rupa, and was the slayer of Dadhici and Vritra.

Viswa-rupa was a great worker, Dadhici was wise, and Vritra was an equally great devotee. These slayers are definitely very cruel and heinous. But out of the Kripa of Bhagavan, no evil proceeded out of these actions. The Lord saved Indra out of His great mercy to him. Indra survived, even when he was struck by thunder in the womb of his mother Diti. This is pusti par excellence.

All the four different kinds of results flow from pusti. Kartya-viryya was crowned king, because he was favoured with pusti. Deva-huti was liberated, her penance and sacrifices were only means to win the anugraha. The muttering of names of Aja-mila was also meant to further this pusti. When the devotee out of a profound attachment to God, is full of His thoughts, he has no longer anything to fear from here or hereafter. God holds in abeyance the influence of kala, dharma and swa-bhava. There is the establishment of a correspondence between God and man on the plane of body (which is a form of bhava. See Ch. II). The maintenance of the body does no longer depend on human efforts. In depends on the grace of God. The man who has been charged with this bhava, maintains his body simply on this consideration.

It must have been noticed from the foregoing discussion that cit-sakti occupies a very prominent place in the

schemes of Ramanuja, Nimbarka, Madhva as also in Vallabha. It has been also noted that though visuddha-

sattva in Ramanuja and Nimbarka, comes under a-cit tattva, yet it is always being super-imposed by the cit of Bhagavan.

This cid-ananda is rasa. The jivas thrive on it for their existence. This is the source of all joy and delight. The

various descriptions of Rasa, which one comes across in Rasa literature, all speak of this manifest aspect of God

(karya-bhukta amsa). The methods of Rasa realisation are very different. This accounts for how Rasa, though essen-

tially one, manifests itself in diverse forms in the hearts of the rasika, and is known as Rasa. Such appearance would

have been impossible without steadfast bhakti. It has also to be admitted that the visible outward manifestation of God

is in the form of Rasa. Purusottama in his Vidvan mandana-tika writes, bahirabir-bhutasyapi bhagavato rasa-

ttvamabadham. There is another position. Just as God is of the nature of Rasa, so also He enjoys or relishes all Rasas.

He is Rasa, and at the same time, relishes all Rasas. It should be remembered further that bhavás are also not

different from the essential nature of God.

VII

The Abhidhamma-Samgraha also expounds this concept of purified Soul (Sila-visuddhi) merging into dhyana-citta.

Those who care for Rupa citta or dhyana-citta, must walk very carefully and perform the five virtues (pancha-sila).

One must fix his mind and vision whole-heartedly on the selected object, and go on meditating. Then a time

comes when the selected object becomes equally manifest, no matter if the eyes are open and shut. The object of the

visual image is called "parikarma-nimitta"; the object of the mental image is called "udgraha-nimitta" ; when the

mind is completely focussed on "udgraha-nimitta", then out of that image, there issues a bright, purified image. This is

called "prati-bhaga-nimitta".119 The objects of the visual image (parikarma) and mental image (udgraha) together

constitute what is called "parikarma-dhyana".

The Abhidhammartha Samgraha divides Rupavacara Kusala Citta into five stages. These five elements in the first

Rupavacara dhyana-citta are vitarka, vicara, priti, sukha and

26 (OP 179)

180

ekagrata. "Vitarka" marks that stage of the citta, at whose attraction things are cognised in the citta. Vitarka thus works against the inertia of the citta, and helps in the liquidation of "Sthana-middha".120 It reflects over and over again the nature of the thing, and thus takes the mind to the object. It has been alternatively called "Cinta". Once the thing has been cognised by Vitarka, the next stage of the mind, "Vicara"121 delves deep into it, in order to know its precise nature. It is always going down into the depths of analysis ; and that is why, it is characterised by prajna or wisdom. It cannot be swayed by Vicikitsa, because it is rooted firmly in prajna. Thus Vicara works against Vicikitsa, which is an impurity of the citta ; Vicara is thus a dhyananga.

The citta which is without any fear when resting on an object, has "priti". Priti is naturally full of delight. It exhilarates the citta, and removes "Vyapada", which again being of an impure nature, always disturbs the mind. So Priti and Vyapada are opposed, just as Vicara and Vicikitsa are opposed. Priti is always accompanied by "Sukha" or delight. When the citta is removed from all other supports, then the citta attains a state, which is known as "ekagrata". Ekagrata is thus opposed to that state of mind, which seeks for support (alambana) diverse things.

Vitarka thus brings close to the mind the object of sense. Vicara makes the mind deeply absorbed in it. Priti delights the mind through this new sense of possession. Sukha reorganises the whole pattern of relations, and eka-grata transfixes the mind.

The above analysis must have pointed out that the object of all these citta, is the same. There has only been a gradual refinement, a removal of hindrances which stand in the way to complete enjoyment. The five different kinds of Rupavacara citta mark the five different stages of this gradual refinement. With the disappearance of "Sthana-middha", vitarka is strengthened ; with the disappearance of vicikitsa, vicara becomes prominent ; with the removal of vyapada, priti, and with the conquering of auddhata-kaukrita, Sukha appears. When the mind is completely dis-engaged from Kama-chanda, there is ekagrata. This un-alloyed, tranquil state of pratibhanimitta is called "aparna".122 Aparna is the stage of complete absorption. The mind is fully active, much more so than what it is at any other stage. But the senses become inactive. In other words, eyes see objects, but do not carry any message ; the

181

ears hear, but are indifferent to what it is ; and so on with

all other senses. The senses become intensely active ; but

they become, at the same time, unattached to the objects of

sense. The citta becomes very powerful and keen. At this

moment, there is prajna. This prajna cuts the roots of all

attachments.

The Sadharma aims at "nirvana" or total annihilation,

through careful restraint of body and speech, or observance

of sila and regulation of life. For Sila is the foundation of

a purified life. Sila is an essential element of Samadhi. Sila

is to be prescribed according to character, as medicine is

prescribed according to disease. When the Citta is steadfast

in contemplation at the pratibhaga-nimitta stage, then the

citta has reached "upacara Samadhi". With this upacara

samadhi, "nivarana" for the time being is held in suspense,

and there is a flow of "priti" in the citta. The other angas

of dhyana are replenished with this priti-rasa. This is what

is known as "aparna Samadhi" or complete absorption. As

a result of this "aparna Samadhi", the citta is freed from

all "nivarana", and is at the same time, flushed with "priti"

-and this is known as "citta-visuddhi" or purification of

mind.

The aspirant after mokhsa first tranquillises his

troubled mind (citta), and relying on the foundations of his

sila, must repeatedly practise to reach the higher stages.

The Silas shall lead us into right speech and right conduct ;

these shall do away with all discrepancies. At the Samadhi

stage, one gets infinite pleasure ; the klesas are controlled ;

citta becoming purified, is fitter for the attainment of prajna.

This is the peculiarity of Samatha bhavana.

It has already been seen how great is the importance

of the concept of Visuddha Sattva in Samkhya analysis, as

also in the analysis of the Vedanta. The Abhidamma

analysis is not essentially different from this analysis of the

Visuddha-Sattva. Prof. Stcherbatsky discusses in detail the

affinity of the dharmas of the Buddhists and the Gunas of

the Samkhya (I.H.Q. Vol. X. pp. 737-60). It is indeed

astonishing to notice that some of the fundamental concep-

tions of the Abhidharmists together with the manner of

argument advanced by them to establish their validity,

closely follow those of the particular school of Samkhya

represented in the Yoga-Sutra and specially in its Bhasya

(Central conception of Buddhism. Chap. XII - Prof.

Stcherbatsky). Bharata's Rasa-analysis which is strikingly

similar to Patanjala analysis, should profitably be studied

against the background of Abhidhamma philosophy.

The full process in the practice of Samatha medita-

tion from the very beginning right up to the attainment of

Jhana, may be roughly described as follows : The Yogava-

cara selects an object (Kammathana) ; he draws his thoughts

from all sides and tries to concentrate on the object, known

as parikarma nimitta. From parikarma nimitta, he passed

to the imagery symbol or uggha nimitta. After a continued

practice, the details of the "image" vanish away, and it

becomes a disc of clear brilliance. It is called patibhaga

nimitta or the transformed after-image. In all these three

cases, there is a gradual sublimation, and a process of puri-

fication. In a case where there arises a Patibhaga Nimitta,

the Upacara stage of meditation becomes very strong in

which all the Nivarānas are suppressed. These Nivarānas

stand in the way of complete and detached experience. Then

the five constituents of Jhana—i.e. Vitakka, Vicara, Pīti,

Sukha and Ekaggatā—appear in prominence, and the first

Jhāna is obtained, which is the Appanā stage of medita-

tion.

Coming to the fundamentals of aesthetic enjoyment, it

will be seen that the highest enjoyment is for him, who is

unaffected by all bhāvas. He is sarva-bhāvamaya, precisely

because he is beyond all. The question arises, who enjoys ?

What is it which he enjoys ? When does he enjoy ? Where

does the enjoyment take place ? Who again is the specta-

tor ? Who is the player ? In reality, there is but one un-

differentiated, unique reality (See Ch. IX). We ourselves

are the player. We ourselves are the spectator. A passive

spectator can hardly ever enjoy the essence of Rasa. He

must be a "sa-hrdaya" preksaka. In other words, the

spectator is charged with bhāva. If the spectator be not

"sa-hrdaya" or "sumanasā", there is no longer any

"spectacle, or necessity for plays and poems. A visuddha-

drasta or purified spectator looks at manas and prāna. As

he looks on, these last two become inactive, and the spec-

tacle stops and ceases to interest him. At such a moment,

there is visrānti. The ideal of the Rasa-vādin is something

very different. The spectacle goes on, and yet the spectator

is absolutely unaffected by it, and is asanga. In Ch. X, it

will be seen how the highest ideal of Rasa-enjoyment is

achieved when the most intense bhoga goes hand in hand

with the severest renunciation. It is where bhukti blends

with mukti. Such an ideal is only attainable when the spectator is at once sumanassa and preksaka, the two primary requisite in Rasa enjoyment.

When a man has attained this stage of Visuddha Sattva, he is at once 'sumanasa' and 'preksaka', the two characters, which the true experiencer of an object of art, must possess. Bharata in Ch. VI of the Natya-Sastra, has spoken at length of sumanasa preksaka. It should be clearly recognised that one who is sumanasa or in sympathy with the object of vision or of hearing, in ordinary life, cannot be detached spectator, or preksaka. One who is sumanasa, is held by the object of sense. Again, one who is preksaka cannot be in sympathy with it. This is only possible when the spectator has attained a purified state of mind, or Visuddha-Sattva. Visuddha-Sattva is the platform on which meet these two, the sympathetic on-looker and the detached spectator. Sympathy and detachment, while otherwise incompatible, become eminently compatible, because both meet on the plane of Visuddha-Sattva.

CHAPTER V

Visuddhi in Indian and Greek Analyses.

I

If Rasa be only an attribute of Visuddha-Sattva, the question naturally arises what is the criterion of this Visuddhi or purification. The question is of great importance, for this same criterion applies equally to Bharata’s analysis, as also to the different systems of Indian philosophy. The two characters of an ideal aesthete are according to Bharata, sumanasa and preksaka. Both are the result of Sattva-suddhi. This concept of suddhi or purification has played an important role in the evolution of thought in both India and Greece.

Preksaka or the detached spectator is not held by the diversity and glamour of the spectacle; he has travelled far beyond mere sensuous impressions. Visual and auditory messages do not bring to him any appeal to the senses. He has a purified soul, a purification made possible by the perfect balance between contending mental faculties. As a result of sattva suddhi, he can at a moment’s notice, identify himself with the sense-object. When this sattva has been sufficiently purified, then the mind becomes transparent like a mirror. It reflects everything that has happened from time immemorial. The Abadya-Yoigisavya story told in the Yoga-Bhasya (III. 18) beautifully illustrates how this retention in memory is made possible. Abadya once asked Lord Yoigisavya, “Lord, you have again and again, been born as god, man and animal. How is it that your intellect is as pure as ever ? I would very much like to know the different kinds of experience, which you did have in these different lives. Which had been the most pleasant life, and which one the most painful ?” Yoigisavya said, “My dear pupil, not one of all the lives that I have lived, was pleasant.” Abadya enquired, “Is unlimited power like that of God equally sorrowful ?” Yoigisavya answered, “Unlimited and god-like power is certainly enviable ; but Kaivalya exceeds them all”. The question is how could Yoigisavya remember all that happened to him in all these different lives. The answer is that Yoigisavya had reached such a stage of purification, that barriers of

185

of time are no barrier to him, and his mind can travel wherever it may like. Patanjala writes, संस्कारसाक्षात्करणात् पूर्वजातिज्ञानम्। Caraka similarly holds that it is possible to remember past lives, if the mind be pure. यदा तु तेनैव शुद्धेन संयुज्यते तदा जातिप्रतीत्यान्तयस्य स्मरति। स्मृत्᐀ हि ज्ञानात्मकस्तस्मै मनसोनुवन्धादनुवर्त्तते यस्यानुबुद्धि᐀ पुरस्कृत्य पुरुषो जातिस्मर इत्युच्यते इति सत्त्वमुक्तम्। (Sarira 3. 19.) (123)

There is another aspect of this problem. It is that ideal aesthetic enjoyment presuppose complete identification with the object of sense. This is what in European aesthetics, has been called, the universalising power of sympathy. It should be remembered that ectasy universalises our limited self. This is one of the grounds of Aristotle's defence of poetry against Plato's charges. The Indian analysis emphasizes that such ecstasy or standing out of ourselves is only possible when purification of both mind and soul has been achieved.

When there is this sympathy with the objective world, the purified soul no longer stands aloof in isolation. It goes out, and becomes one with it. In the Bhagavad the case of "Kita-bhringa-kaya" (worm taking on the appearance of bhringa) is cited, to illustrate the nature of this kind of worship. The worm gradually loses its distinctiveness, and becomes identified with bhringa. This sympathy with the objective world can again be traced to the Sampad upasana of the Upanishads. The Upanishad divides Symbolic worship (pratiko-pasana) into two branches—Sampad and Adhyasa. Citsukha⸫ya in "Bhasyabhavaprakasika" writes, "when a superior object is imposed through certain resemblances on an inferior object as a support, then it is a case of Sampadopasana, Such is the case with manas. which resembles the universal mind in its infinitude. But in adhyasa, alambana predominates". In the Bhamati, we find, "Universal mind has affinity with universal gods. So these gods should be invoked in the mind ; but at the same time, the mind being almost dispensed with, and gods being mediated upon, there is the attainment of eternal life. But in adhyasa, the support is more important ; the impositions are secondary". The writer of Kalpataru writes, "In Sampad Upasana, the impositions are more important ; in adhyasa, the support predominates." Appaya Diksita similarly writes

186

in "Parimala" सम्पदुपासनामारोप्यप्राधान्यम् । प्रतोकोपासनामधिष्ठान

प्राधान्यम् । The question is that such impositions are only

possible, when body and soul have already been purified.

When the mind is purified, there is a kind of Sampad

Upasana. The mind identifies itself with the object of wor-

ship, much as the worm is identified with the bhringa. The

Vedas also speak of the ideals of Moksha-dharma as imita-

tion of godly ways. God also is imitating Himself when He

is creating new worlds. Imitation is very important, imita-

tion involving identification with the objects of sense. The

precise significance of why drama has been called imitation

of ways (अवस्थानुकृतिम् नाट्यम् ) has not been properly

understood. Imitation may be either of external manners or

of inward feelings. This last imitation has been called by

Bharata, Sattvika abhinaya. There seems to be much point

in Bharata's calling this type of acting as Sattvika.

Abhinaya being essentially anukriti or imitation, is essen-

tially a Sampad Upasana. It being an imitation of Sattvika

bhavás, there is all the more reason why Bharata should

have called this type of acting as Sattvika. This is only

possible when the process of purification has already been

carried out, so that the spectator of the dramatic show, can

identify himself with it.

Abhinavagupta in his analysis of the sources of plea-

sure in art, emphasizes this imposition of a new world of

make-belief on the everyday world of experience. The mind

of the spectator is clear ; and he is now visuddha-sattva.

His sattva being visuddha, can take the impress of any

other form. It explains why with a purified soul, the appeal

of art is instantaneous and immediate. For the time being,

he forgets his temporal relations, and thinks himself to be

a Rama or a Ravana. Truth or falsehood is to be deter-

mined with reference to reality. But when reality itself

is held in suspense, the super-imposed world becomes self-

sufficient unto itself. The question of truth or falsehood

does not enter here. Simultaneously, the accompanying

songs and dance, appropriate to the superimposed forms,

strengthen the belief that the forms are real. Just as the

superimposed forms are becoming more real, the spectator

identifies himself with what he has been witnessing. This is

possible, as already noticed, only when the purification of

soul has already been carried out to some extent.

Bhatta-tauta in explaining what is natya, says that it is

the content of a particular kind of experience. What is the nature of this content? There is a forgetfulness when one

sees an actor on board the stage, that the actor is one whom he knows in actual life. The superimposed form of the

character has obscured the individuality of the actor. An actor when he is acting, has lost his limited, essentially

circumscribed narrow self. His appearance on board the stage, is accompanied with music and dance. The actor is

no longer an actor ; on him is superimposed the character of Rama or Ravana, as the case might be. The superimposi-

tion is possible as a result of purification of the spectator’s soul. For if the spectator had been circumscribed and not

purified, he could not have been able to superimpose this Rama or Ravana on the actor himself. This superimposition

of one form or another, which is the foundation of make-belief, presupposes a freedom and agility in the spectator.

These again, are only possible, when the spectator has already reached a purified state. This is one aspect of the

problem. It appears that the ideal spectator is at once becoming, like the kita-bhringa identified with the object

of representation. At the same time, he is standing aloof from all sense-impressions, and flying to a world, all his own.

It might be legitimately asked if the spectator is completely purified from the dominance of Rajas and Tamas,

and lives a life of pure Sattva, how it is that after the enjoyment, he comes back once again to this world. Patan-

jala holds that when the soul is completely purified, there is no coming back again to this world. Then the soul

rests content in its own self नदा दृष्ट: स्वरूपप्रतिष्ठम् । (1. 3.)

But resting content in its own self is not the only characteristic of art experience. There is at the

same time, an identification with the sense object (I.4). This Vrittisarupya, which is a result of Sattva-suddhi,

is of the nature of Sampad Upasana. The common subject in all such faculties, as “I see”, “I hear”, “I decide” is

obviously myself. The essence of this concept of “I” is the Purusa, who sees everywhere, This seer is of the nature of

consciousness or citainya. Consciousness when charged with this Seer, helps manifest Buddhi or Intelligence.

Whatever is manifested to our senses, is known as drsya. This is what has been called anara, and is made up of any

one of the five elements. At the beginning of Chapter IV it was found how bhuta (things) and indriya (senses) both

27 (OP 179)

188

enter into the world of drsya. In this knowledge through senses, there is the co-operation of “I” as experiencer, citta with the indriyas as faculties, and objects as knowables. It has also been noticed how citta though only an instrument in the matter of knowledge, becomes the object of sense under certain circumstances. Citta is constituted of self-centering abhimana. The knowledge of sense-objects held in the citta is only the manifestation of this abhimana. When the citta is calm, then ahamkara or abhimana becomes manifest. At this moment, citta which looks everywhere, becomes drsya, or passive and of an inert nature, and ahamkara or purified abhimana becomes charged with energy, and is a karana. Once again, when abhimana is held in check, and there is only the clear sense of my existence, then abhimana rooted in ahamkara, takes on the character of drsya. At that moment the purified sense of ahamsmi or buddhi becomes charged with energy and as such, is a karana. But buddhi again, is subject to change, and is of the nature of a substance. When the purusa knows the nature of this change, and learns through deep meditation to distinguish himself from buddhi itself, then complete knowledge or detachment has been reached. With continued practice, when this Viveka-jnana becomes un-manifest through self-renunciation, or when there is nothing to circumscribe the sense of self, then purusa becomes the ideal spectator. At that moment, even buddhi becomes an object of sense. So everything from buddhi downwards belongs to the world of sense.

The Yoga-bhashya in analysing this process of purification, seems to emphasize the distinction between matter and energy. Drsyavarga belongs to the world of dead matter. Purification means liberation of energy from the dominance of matter. It must have been noticed from the above analysis, how everything in the world, beginning with sense-impressions, is constituted of both matter and energy. The distinction between citta and buddhi appears to be the relative predominance of Tamas in one and Sattva in another, though it should be clearly recognised that all three elements are present in both. Drsya and Karana between themselves make up the world ; all that the Yogin aims at is to have more of karana, and less of drsya. When the Yogin has accustomed himself to this blissful state of Sattvika bhava, his mind becomes flushed, and he is without any sorrow. This is known as “Visoka”. This again is

189

known as "Self-illuminated", on account of the excess of

Sattva in it. This is the ideal and aim of all Yogic practi-

tioners (Yoga-Sutra. I.36). At this moment, there appears

before the mind a sea of calm and tranquil light, crystal

clear and dazzlingly white. There are reflected in this sea

the glows of sun, and the moon, and of jewels of many

colours. Once there is this apprehension of this light, there

is an end to all sorrows and griefs. At this moment, the

soul is completely purified, and flooded with an ethereal

light.

The existence of non-soul is justified, when it is iden-

tified with soul. Non-soul attains this fruition, when non-soul

appears to us as भाति, स्फुरति । But this भान or स्फुरण is only

of the soul. The presence of non-soul can only diversify this

shining or flashing out of soul. The uniform and steady

shining out or flashing forth of soul substance cannot be

perceived by common man. But this uniform and steady

shining out becomes diversified and many-coloured at the

presence of non-soul. For the moment the soul ceases to

flash out, the non-soul loses its very existence. This explains

the statement, "तदेव भान्तमनुभाति सर्वं, तस्य भासा सर्वमिवाभाति" ।

Looked at from this standpoint, there is manifestation of

only the soul-substance. Non-soul can only share in this

illumination अनुमान, अनुस्फुरण-भान्तमनुभाति, स्फुरन्तमनुस्फुरति ।

There is no diversification in the shining out of a perfectly

pure soul ; it is always the same, and hence unknown to

common man. All diversifications come in with the parti-

cipation of non-soul in this illumination of soul*। The great

importance of non-soul lies in thus making diversified the

self-same luminosity of the soul. If there had not been such

diversification in the participated luminousness (= अनुस्फुरण)

the soul (= आत्मवस्तु) itself would have disappeared.

The existence of and emergence of non-soul can only be

justified from the standpoint of making cognisable the

luminosity of soul. The Rg-veda writes रूपं रूपं प्रतिरूपो बभूव ।

"The Beautiful came to participate

in beautiful things. । It was to make intelligible His

• The Pratyabhijna analysis reminds one of Shelley's

"Life is a dome of many-colour'd glass

That stains the white light of eternity."

own beauty”. The Supreme Being in order to make easily

available His own beautiful form to mortals, seeks the help

of non-soul substances, and thus diversifies His own luminous-

ity. When there is this shining forth of a host of diverse

things, then we are sent back to that one luminousness,

whose different manifestations are all such particular shin-

ing out and diversified luminousness. The one and the same

shining out appears different as it is reflected in different

non-soul substances. The undisturbed, self-same luminosity

is Videhamukti, or supreme liberation (parama kaivalya).

But the diversified luminosity of soul substance is of the

nature of jivan-mukti. It has got to be remembered that

in both jivan-mukta and bandha conditions, the luminosity

is diversified. But while in jivan-mukta, the “tendency” to

luminosity is undisturbed ; in the case of an unemancipated

soul (=बन्धावस्था) the tendency to luminosity is checked,

and appears in different forms ( = विविधस्पुरितनिष्ठता ). The

“tendency” or “propensity” to diversified luminosity is no

hindrance to the luminosity of soul of the jivan-mukta.

There is gain or loss of the essence of the unemancipated

soul in diversified luminosity. To look at the variety of this

world, and to become various with it, is to be unemancipat-

ed. But the jivan-mukta looks at this manifold and diverse

world, seated unchanged in his own self. The Rasa enjoyer

is not disturbed in his enjoyment of different Rasas, though

obviously the Rasas are all diversified and different from

one another. He enjoys only the particularity of Rasas ;

the universal content of Rasas is beyond his grasp. In all

conditions, the Rasa-enjoyment goes on undisturbed, though

vibhava, anubhava are always colouring and diversifying

the universal content of Rasa. The average man cannot look

beyond mere diversifications, and enjoys only the diversi-

fications wrought by vibhava and anubhava. Ordinary men

and women are held by the diversity of sense objects ; the

Rasa enjoyer is unattached to the sensuousness of the

objective world of experience. In this way, the attitudes of

the Rasa-enjoyer and the jivan-mukta are very similar,

and almost identical.

II

In Ch. II, it was found that the positions “I see” or

"I hear" imply a difference between subject and object.

191

The moment there is any cognition, there is the realisation

of this difference. The avyakta in its emergent evolution,

first becomes ahamkara. The Samkhya analysis points out

that in this evolution from avyakta, there was first sound,

which is constituted of one laksana or bhuta. Next comes

touch, which is characterised by two bhutas. So sight is of

three, taste of four, and smell of five bhutas. This grada-

tion of elements, according to their constituents, is the

determining factor why Rupakas which appeal to us through

sight, should have a more limited range than Kavyas,

whose appeal lies predominantly through ears. Whenever

there is any kind of knowledge there is the sense that it is

I who sees, I who hears or I who smells. This transforma-

tion of mahat is known as abhimana or ahamkara. The

sense or indriyas are again the transformations of ahamkara.

Sound or vision are transformations in a double sense. The

knowledge-content of sound or vision is to be explained by

the changes of our ahamkara ;*1 and the activities of the

outside world which are productive of sound or vision are

the result of changes of that one great Brahma.

The realisation of this difference between “I” and the

objective world is the first requisite in all kinds of cogni-

tions. The spectator and the objects seen, meet on a com-

mon ground, making possible the shining out or sphurana

of the soul. But if the spectator and the objects seen had

been completely identical and co-extensive, then there

would no longer be any cognition, for the shining forth

would no longer be varied, and knowledge itself would

no longer be varied, and knowledge itself would become

impossible. It should be clearly recognized that whenever

there is any kind of knowledge, the sentient soul has got

to be of the nature of aprakrita visuddha sattva, or must

be vested with sakti. The sattvic nature of soul helps it to

perceive things. In order to become aware of such percep-

tions, the soul has got to retain these images ; and so it

must become tamasic in nature. So in all forms of knowledge

and Rasa-realisation must begin with sense-impressions,

the soul is aprakrita Visuddha Sattva. It should be noted

that without the relation of grahya-grahaka, there can be

no cognition. The opposition of grahya and grahaka is but

another form of how sattva is always being interpenetrated

1 A Brief Introduction to a Comparative Study of Greek and Indian Poetics

and Aesthetics, Sec. II—R. Sen. (Sen Ray and Co. Ltd.)

192

by tamas. If a sense is to be grahaka, it must be of a tamas nature. So the seeing eye, the listening ear are all of a tamasic character. But the objects of perception, the beautiful sky or the melodious note must be of a sattvic nature. According to Vaicesika analysis, the perceptor is more subtle, while the object of perception is more gross. In all kinds of perception, the perceptor and the object of perception must be brought together (vide Ch. II).

The Saiva system and its Pratyabhijna branch are equally emphatic on the importance of sakti for manifest creation. In the stage after the Iswara-Tattva, there arises an equalisation in prominence of the two aspects of the Experience, which then takes the form "I am this", in which both the "I" and the "This" are realised with equal clearness, so much so that, while they are felt as entirely identified with each other, they can yet be clearly separated in thought—so that the "I" can be realised as the subject and the "This" as the object of experience. This experience of equalising the realisation of the two sides of the relation of identity namely, "I am this", and also of what may be called possession—of one of the two sides as belonging to the other is called the sad-vidya or Shuddha-vidya—the state of experience (or knowledge) in which the true relation of things is realised.

From the balancing in realisation of the two factors, the "I" and the "This" of the experience in this state, and from simultaneously realising the one as belonging to the other, there follows an important result ; namely, there arises for the first time, what may be called the Experience of diversity-in-unity-and-identity (Bheda-abheda) or as it is also called, paraparadasa (Iswar-Pratyabhijna, III.i.5). This new Experience may really be said to correspond at a lower stage, as just stated, to the One which enables an individual human being to regard his body and thoughts and feelings as at once diverse and different from, and yet one and identical with himself, and to think and speak of their totality as at once "I" and "mine". In Iswara-PratyabhijnaVimarsini, while abhijna is of the nature of soul, vimarsa is its sakti, so that knowledge is made possible because of the presence of sakti. Rasa arises in the Shuddha Vidya state, because the Experiencer has his attention—or what corresponds to it in a lower state—drawn equally to himself as the "I" of the Experience (abhijna) and to the "This", as what has been called the object of the Experience

193

(Vimarsa). This experience which is at once of “I” and

“mine”, comprehending all subject-object relationships, is

only possible in the Shuddha-vidya stage. This subject-

object relationship is split, the moment the mind is directed

exclusively to either “I” or “mine”. This directed motiva-

tion is the result of impure Sattva, when losing the original

balance, the mind looks for gratification of sensuous

pleasure.

Bhatta Kallata in Spanda-Pradipika, finds at the root

of all transient pleasure this impure motivation. Bhatta

Kallata points out that though fundamentally jiva and Siva

are the same, the jiva becomes self-centred and motivated,

because of the clouding of the pure self of Siva. This moti-

vation is the result of impurities in the jiva, the jiva for

the time being, is attracted by such transient pleasure. On

p. 38-39, of Spanda-Karika (Kashmir Sanskrit Series), Kallata

writes,

निजरुदयसमर्थस्य कर्तृव्यषमिलाषिणः।

यदा क्षोभः प्रलीयते तदा स्यात् परमं पदम् ॥ (124)

The jiva becomes differentiated from Siva, when he is

centred in his own self. This क्षोभ in Saiva system cor-

responds to माया in Vedanta. The ultimate reality mani-

fests itself through this sakti.

The pramatrittva or jnatrittva of the parama Siva,

being the result of Sakti, all sense-knowledge—the array

of vibhavas or ahara—is only possible because of the

presence of cit-sakti. The soul in so far as it is grahaka, is

tinged with tamas ; and in so far as it is grahya, is full of

sattva. In the analysis of how there is sense-knowledge, it

was found that there is always the relation between indriya

and indriyartha, between grahya and grahaka. Bhatta

Kallata also finds how the indriyas (which are jada) are

activated by the purusa. तत् कर्थ तद्लसस्पर्शात् पुरुष तद्विल क्षण

क्षोभात्मकमेव धर्मम् आसादयेतू, येन युक्त इन्द्रियवर्ग प्रबर्त्यादि लम्भयन्, अहं

करोमी, अहं जागागि, इति स्वविषयप्रतिपद्यमानः क्षुभित एव भवति ? (p.39) (125)

It should be clearly recognised that all forms of

cognition must assume the pattern of कार्यकत्तृत्व. While

कार्य is of the nature of jada, कत्तृत्व is always of the

nature of Cetana. Kallata writes, कार्यकत्तु त्वश्बिदतत् कत्तु त्वेन

194

भोक्तृत्वेन वैदकत्वेन चेतनभावेन अहन् इति एका अवस्था खन्त्रा, द्वितीया तु तद्विपरीता कार्यरूपा भोग्या वेद्या जडा परन्त्रा ताम्या "शक्ति" कथितम् । (126)

But such a state is unattainable in the world of art:

When all sakti has ceased to operate, the atman rests like

a calm, perfectly still sheet of water, unknown to sensory

knowledge ननु प्रलयदेहायहप्रत्ययलक्षणाश्रों निर्यातनिश्शूलाजलधिवत्

पसुप्रशान्ततस्थितिः आत्मैव परमद शब्दप्रतिपादितः:

The purusa by itself, is a calm, unmoved entity ; it is per-

fect Being. But all becoming, belonging to the transient

world, is due to the play of sakti. This disturbance in the

purusa or soul caused by the sakti, is the beginning of

creation. The indriya-varga are jada, while the cit isajada.

Aesthetic experience is entirely due to cit-sakti without

which there cannot be any knowledge whatsoever.

According to Saiva Agama, the world has Siva for its

first cause, Sakti for its instrumental cause, and maya for

its material cause. Siva is everlasting, since he is not

limited by time. He is omnipresent. He works through his

Sakti, which is not unconscious, but conscious energy—the

very body of God. This body is composed of the five mantras

(Taittiriya Aranyaka. X. 43,47), and subserves the five

functions of creation, sustenance and destruction of the

universe, obscuration or embodiment and liberation of the

souls. His knowledge is evershining and immediate. Accord-

ing to the Pausakara Agama, Sakti, called Kundalini (the

coiled) or suddha-maya, is that from which Siva derives

these functions and in which his being is grounded. Sakti is

the intermediate link between Siva, pure consciousness,

and matter, the unconscious. It is the upādhi, the cause of

the differentiation of Siva's functions (Pausakara Agama,

II. i). It is the cause of the bondage of all beings from

Ananta, who is next only to Siva, downwards, and also of

their release. Sakti, often called Uma, is but the reflex of

Siva, and not an independent existence. The Absolute in

itself, is called Siva, and the Absolute in relation to objects,

is called Sakti.

"The concept of Sakti as developed in the Pancaratra

is strikingly similar to the concept of Sakti in Kashmir

Saivism. Dr. Schrader holds that most of the older samhitas

of the Pancaratra were written in Kashmir. Even if

Dr. Schrader's opinion be not fully accepted, there can be

no doubt that there is a very deep-rooted connection between

195

the Sakti concepts of the Pancaratra and Kashmir Saivism. Kashmir Saivism looks at Siva as the ultimate reality. This Siva contemplates Himself. This self-contemplation characterises the nirguna, nirakara and niskala Siva. This Supreme Siva is one, rooted in an eternal dualism. In Him lies the para-Sakti, who even when completely identified with Him, carries the seeds of future birth. The Supreme Lord or Parama Siva is thus the union of Siva-Sakti, or their Samghatta :

तयोर्यदयामलसङ्घात् स संघट्ट इति स्मृतः

(Tantraloka 3. 67)

This Samghatta or Yamala is शक्ति शक्तिमतोरत्सामरस्यात्मा (Jayaratha’s tika on Tantraloka 1.1). This Supreme Lord, Siva is eternal ; so also is Sakti, who is identified with Parama Siva, eternal and without any change :

शिवशक्त्यविनाभावाद्वृत्यैकता मूलकारणम्—

(Tantraloka 9.152). The Siva Sutra-Vartika speaks of this Sakti as स्वपदर्शक्ति (I. 17). The Vritti explains this Sakti, as

स्वपदं सत्पदं ज्ञोयं शिवरूपं यदूदोरितम् ।

तद्वोर्हि एक-क्रिया-रूपं यत् सा शक्ति: प्रकीर्तिता ॥

"Swa-pada is Sat-pada ; this is the knowledge of Siva. The power of this Siva in the form of visible manifestation is known as Sakti". The first awakening of this Sakti-tattva is the result of the fullest realisation of Parama Siva. This is His vibrant manifestation or Spanda-rupa. Siva in the form of Cit begins to manifest Himself at His own will ; this is His completest realisation of Himself as Spanda or vibration. This state is known as चिदाह्लादमात्रानुभवतल्लय

or when He delights in Himself. He is of the nature of delight ; and His delight means that He enjoys Himself. From the self-introspection arise all His will-power, knowledge and activities. The Sakti of this Self-same entity is manifested in these three forms, will-power, knowledge and activities. These three Saktis have reached a perfect balance (or Samarāsya) in Him. Parama Siva remains undifferentiated. He himself is of the nature of Supreme delight at this moment. The Siva-dristi of Somananda writes (I.3-4),

स यदास्ते चिदाह्लादमात्रानुमवतल्लयः ।

तदिस्था तावती तावद् ज्ञानं तावत् क्रिया हि सा॥

सुसूक्ष्म-शक्तित्रय सामरस्येन वर्तते ।

चिद्रूपाह्लादपरमो निर्विभागः पयस्तदा ॥ (127)

28 (OP 179)

196

Even when the Lord is turned back on Himself, and possessing all the faculties, goes on contemplating, there is no divorce between Him and His Sakti, which is of the nature of will, knowledge and action. When this full and complete Being begins to think of Himself, there is the emergence of Sakti. Siva possesses Sakti. He is ever accompanied with Her. He can do whatsoever He may like by just wishing it to be done. He looks, and the world is created. This will of Siva is His Sakti. So Siva can never be without Sakti just as Sakti also can never exist in isolation. The true Saivites will never differentiate Sakti from Saktimana. Sive without Sakti is meaningless. The Siva-dristi of Somananda writes, (III. 2-3).

न शिवः शक्तिरहितो न शक्तिर्यस्यतिरेकिनौ ॥

शिवः शक्सतथा भावान् इच्छया कर्तुमोहेते ।

शक्त्यैवं ततो मेदः शैव जान्तु न वण्र्यते ॥

न कदाचन तस्यास्ति कैवल्यं शक्तिशून्यकम् । (128)

The Pancaratra equally recognises the substance-quality (dharma-dharmittva) relation between Sakti and the one, who possesses it. The Saiva Agama equally recognises that standpoint. Just as there cannot be fire which does not burn, so also there is no Siva which is not with His Sakti. Fire and Combustion, like Siva and Sakti always go together.

शक्तिशक्तिमतो यद्बद् अमेदः सर्वदा स्थितः ।

अतस्तद्भेदभांमित्वात् परा शक्ति परात्मनः ॥

न वह दाहिका शक्तिर्य्यतिरिकता विभाव्यते ।

केवलं ज्ञान-शक्त्यां प्रारम्मोयं प्रवेशने ॥

शक्त्यवस्थाप्रविष्टस्य निविभागेन भावना ।

तदासौ शिवरूपो स्यात् शैवी मुखमिहोच्यते ॥ (129)

(Vijnana-Bhairaba 17—20)

The Netra-tantra writes, "That Sakti is only the manifestation of my will-power, the Para-Sakti. She is powerful because of my Sakti ; she is born out of me. Like the heat of the fire, or the rays of the sun, my Sakti is the fountainhead of all the different manifestations of Sakti in the world". (I. 25-26). The Mrigendra-tantra writes,

197

इत्यं शक्तिः कुर्वंती देहकृत्यं

देहामावादुचयते देहशब्दैः ।

तस्यां भेदा येऽपि वामाद्यः स्यु-

स्तेऽपि प्रोक्ता कृतभेदैः सदिनः ॥ (130)

"Sakti performs all the physical needs of Siva. Bodiless

Siva, being of the nature of pure consciousness, must have

Sakti for His Body (I. 3.14). In other words, Sakti makes

the Unmanifest manifest, and performs everything in the

world.

The bheda of Sakti and Saktimana according to

Kashmir Saivism is only a supposition, and not a reality.

The separate existence of Sakti is only a reflection of that

Supreme Being. The Vivritti of Siva-Sutra Vartika (3.30)

writes, "All the Saktis of Parama Siva are the results of

the evolution of Himself ; the world is only the experience

of the manifold ullasas of this evolving Citta ; the Lord

who is one with Sakti, goes on manifesting Himself."

Abhinavagupta in Para-Trimsika 18, explains the nature

of this para-Sakti of Parameswara. It is that power by

which He, while stationed in His own self, supports and

maintains everything from Siva downwards.

The Pancaratra looks at Sakti as necessary for the

self-realisation of Parama Siva. The Supreme Being

separates a portion of Sakti at His will, and finds Himself

eternally manifest in it. The Kashmir Saivism also looks

at the problem from this standpoint. The Sakti which

creates, maintains and destroys, is known as तद्रंमणे रता

(Jayaratha's note on Tantraloka. 1.1). The word तद्रंमरण

means the satisfaction of Parama Siva. But the goddess is

subordinated to the will of the Lord ; so that the Lord is

always looking after Her (Tantraloka. 8.309). The Lord

cannot enjoy Himself, except with the help of this Sakti.

So He is always bestirring the tranquillity of this primary

stuff in the shape of Sakti, and creating forms out of it.

What is the nature of this enjoyment of the Parama Purusa,

asks Abhinavagupta in Tantraloka. It is like the enjoy-

ment of one, deeply asleep, when he is embraced

by his darling wife. He feels a sense of enjoy-

ment in his subconscious mind. So also it is the case

of enjoyment of Siva when embraced by this Mahā-Sakti

(Tantraloka. 10. 145). He thus gets Himself divided into

198

many shapes, so that He may enjoy Himself. The enjoy-

ment of the Supreme Being, who enjoys Himself, is, as if,

the enjoyment in a dream (Abhinavagupta’s Commentary on

Iswara-Pratyabhijna 3.2.1). He divides Himself as Knower

and Knowledge, or Jneyi and jneya. Knowledge is always

of the Knower. The two are interdependent, and cannot be

isolated. Whatever appears as knowledge is only the mani-

festation or bhasa of this Sakti of the Supreme Siva. The

Vijnana Bhairaba, (21) says,

यथालोकेन दोपस्य किरणैरौत्कर्स्य च।

ज्ञापते दिग्विभागादि तद्हुक्त्या शिवः प्रिये ॥ (131)

A lamp is known by its light ; the Sun is known by its

rays, so also the Sakti manifests all that is in Siva.

Abhinavagupta writes that there should be a trans-

parent mirror for the reflection of this cosmic world. Such

a mirror is the pure self of Paramatma. This pure self

becomes the discriminating or receiving organ प्रमाता ; and

the cosmic world is reflected therein. The world is thus the

reflection of the Lord in His own self ; He looks at Himself

as drsya in His own Caitanya. The self can never be mani-

fest, unless it is reflected in the mirror of Sakti. The

reflection of Himself in His own Cit as knowable is the

result of Sakti in himself. This “impure” reflection is pos-

sible only through the grace of Bhairaba.

इथं विश्वमिदं नाथे मैरवोचिदमवरे।

प्रतिविम्वमलं स्वच्छे न स्वल्वन्यप्रसादतः ॥ (132)

(Tantraloka 3.65)

Siva finds Himself reflected in Sakti. The Kama-kala-

Vilasa calls this Sakti the mirror or “nirmal adarsa” of

Siva.

सा जायति शक्तिरदया निजसुखमयैर्नित्यनिरुपमाकारा ।

भाविचाराचरखोजं शिवरूपविमर्शनिर्मलादर्शः ॥ (133)

(Kama-Kala-Vilasa 2)

Sakti is “nija-sukha-maya” meaning that she delights

hence she is nitya-nirupamakara. Again, she is the source

of all future life, and as such, she is the purified Vimarsa

of Siva. The knowledge of Sakti that “I am of Siva” is

the beginning of Vimarsa or Visphurana. The karana of

199

this Vimarsa is Sakti. So Sakti is that mirror in which the

Lord can look at Himself. It is said elsewhere that Siva is

like the sun, Sakti is his rays ; the unchanged, the abso-

lutely unmanifest mahabindu is reflected in this trans-

parent mirror of Sakti. In other words, this unmanifest

mahabindu is reflected in the Sakti of His own Citta.

परशिवरविनिकरे प्रतिबलित विमर्शोदरपणै विशदे ।

प्रतिरुचिरुचिरे कुत्ये चित्तमये निविशते महाविन्दुः ॥

(Kama-Kala 4)

Sakti fulfils all the wishes of Siva. She is known as

Vimarsa-rupini Kameswari. (Kamakalavilasa. 51). This

Supreme Lord and His Sakti are always at play as hamsa

and hamsi.

The knowledge and enjoyment and whatever belongs

to Parama Siva, centres round Sakti. Sakti is not merely

of the nature of jnana or kriya. Sakti is of the essence of

Bliss. She symbolises ananda-Sakti. She is karana ; and

yet She issues out of Siva, who is Cid-rupa, or delight in-

carnate. This delight is at the root of all creation. The

bliss of sexual union of man and woman is only the out-

ward expression of this union of Siva and Sakti, when

ananda which is of the nature of Sakti manifests itself. The

bliss of aesthetic enjoyment is not essentially different from

the bliss of this union—this Samarasya, as the Sakta

Tantras call it. (See Chs. IX and X). What is more important

to remember here in this connection, that Siva is insepar-

able from Sakti, and enjoyment of mortal man is only pos-

sible when the sphurana has become diversified or vicitra.

Avicitra sphurana is accessible only to gods and the

Yogins.

The process of creation receives great attention in the

Saiva system. While Siva is pure consciousness, matter is

pure unconsciousness, and Sakti is said to mediate between

the two. She is not the material cause of the world, since

she is of the nature of consicousness (caitanya). She is the

eternal sound, the connecting link between the gross and

the subtle, the material and the spiritual, the word and the

concept (Pausakara Agama. ii. 17). Suddha-maya, the

mother of the universe, is Vak or Nada, “the voice of the

Silence”. The Sakti also known as Vimarsa is spoken of as

“Svatantra”, because its existence does not depend upon

anything else, as does that of will, knowledge and action,

200

each of which depends for its existence upon what imme- diately precedes. This represents the principal power of the Highest Lord (Maheswara) as the self is often called. This includes all other powers, which are attributed to the Ulti- mate, which itself, is without any motivation. The word "Svantantra" does not imply capriciousness, wantonness or self-willedness, but something which is different from both pure consciousness and pure unconsciousness. Svantantra Sakti has been called sphurattva or spanda in Spanda literature, because it represents that essential nature of the Universal consciousness, which is responsible for its ap- parent change from the state of absolute unity. It has been already noticed how unvaried pulsation or "avicitra sphurana" is not perceptible to human senses. It is also called Mahasattva, (Iswar Pratyabhijna Vimarsini I. 209), because it is the cause of all that can be said to exist in any way. Another name by which it is referred to at some places, is Paravak (Iswar Pratyabhijna. I. 203.), because it represents speech in its most subtle form.

The Siva-Sutra Vimarsini also explains how the atman, when resting in its own self, is not accessible to knowledge. In Unmesa 3, Sutra 9, we find the soul mani- festing itself ; it is steady, unvaried luminosity, and expresses nothing but itself. नृत्यति, अन्तर्बुहितस्वस्वरूपवष्टम्ममूलं तत्त्वजागरादितानानाभुमिका प्रपंचं स्वपरिस्पन्दलीलैव स्वभित्तौ प्रकटयति इति नर्तक आत्मा। The Siva-Sutra Vimarsini writes that there is but one God, the Creator of this manifold universe. संसार- नादप्रवचच्यतया सूत्रे जगति जागृक एक एव परमेश्वरः। But this one God is unmanifest. While atman is unmanifest, the antaratman by its use of Sakti becomes manifest, and hence accessible to knowledge. It becomes cribbed, cabined and confined as compared with the atman. In other words, the unvaried luminosity of atman becomes coloured, as it plays different roles with the help of sakti. The Siva Sutra writes,

रज्यते इव स्मृतम् जगन्नाट्याक्रीडा प्रदर्शनाश्रयेनात्मना इति रंगः, तत्तद्भूमिकाग्रहण- स्थानम् ; अन्तरात्मा, संकोचावभाससतत्व: शून्यप्रधानो वा पूंष्टकरूपोदिहापेक्षया अन्त्यो जीवः। तत्र हि अन्य कृतपदः स्वरसापरिस्पन्दक्रमेण जगन्नाट्य- माभासयति । (134)

While the sphurana of atman is avicitra, and hence un- known, the sphurana of antaratman by participation in Sakti becomes vicitra. The Siva Sutra 12, explains how the

201

soul becomes manifest, when it reflects sakti, which is non-separable from it. The Siva Sutra (3.12) writes

तात्विक स्वरूप विमर्शनविशारदा घिष्णा तद्रूपत्सत्त्वस्य स्कुरच्चात्मनः सूक्ष्मस्य

आन्तरपरिस्पन्दस्य सिद्दिरमिव्यक्तिमेति ।

In 3.15, this para-Sakti is called the cause of the manife-

tation of the soul. In 3.16, it is pointed out how this Sakti is the source of all actions ; it gets immersed in the sea of "para". It becomes limited—the cause of its limitations being the samskaras. The Siva Sutra writes, परं शाक्ते वलं

यस्त्र तिष्ठति, परिहृत परापर ध्यानधारणादि सर्वक्रियाप्रयासो नित्यमन्तर्मुख-

तथा तदेव परमृशति यः, स सुखमनायास्तथा तृप्ते, विश्वप्रवाहप्रसरहेतौ

स्वच्छोच्छल तादिध्यौगिनि परामृतसमुदे निमज्जति देहादिसंकोचसंस्कार वोत्रनैन

तन्मया भवति । (135)

The Siva Sutra writes how in all acts of perception, there is a balance reached between contending opposites (vide Ch. X). This concept of balance between contending opposites is the key to all aesthetic enjoyment. In Unmesa 1, Sutra 15, there is

स च सर्वेषु भूतेषु भावत्वेनैन्द्रियेषु च ।

स्थावरं जगच्चैव चेतनाचेतनं स्थितम् ॥

अध्वानं व्याप्य सर्वं तु सामरस्येन संस्थितः ।

The para sakti of Parama Siva is full of ananda. The maya sakti or prakrita sakti on the other hand, is not ananda-mayi. The ananda sakti is the swarupa sakti of Parama Siva. It is for this reason that para sakti, which is of the nature of ananda, and full of amrita, has been called the mother of sakti-cakra. The Siva-sutra-vartikam (Kasmir Sanskrit Series. 43) writes,

या सा शक्ति' परा सूक्ष्मा व्यापिनी निर्मला शिवा ।

शक्तिचक्रस्य जननी परमानन्दामृतात्मक्मा । (136)

This ananda-mayi Sakti is the Mahamaya, transcending maya. This ananda-sakti has been called “Baindabee Kala” (vide Jayaratha's Commentary on Tantraloka i.1). In other words, it is the seventeenth kala of sakti.

This swarupa sakti, which is of the nature of ananda, belongs to Parama Siva. It is ever inseparable from Parama Siva, and is also known as 'samabayinee sakti'. The

202

existence of this sakti, and its complete significance can

only be understood, when it is remembered that it is the

result of the wish of Parameswara. In Malini-vijayottara-

tantra (Kasmir Sanskrit Series. 37.3.5), it has been found

how this Sakti is inseparable from the will of the Lord.

There is a direct relation between this samabayinee sakti

and Parameswara. Parameswara does "anugraha" to this

sakti. Abhinavagupta in his commentary on Iswara-

Pratyabhijna. 2.3.6, writes

तां शक्तिं समवायार्थ्यां मेदाभेदप्रदर्शनोर्म्।

अनुगृह्णाति सवन्ध इति पूर्वस्य आगमः ॥ (137)

This samabayinee sakti gives rise to Maya-sakti or

Prakrita sakti. Maya sakti has no direct connection with

Parameswara. The samabayinee sakti being the source of

maya or prakrita sakti, is called Sakti or Guna par excel-

lence. Abhinavagupta in his commentary on Iswara-

Pratyabhijna. 2.3.6, writes sakteenamapi sa saktir-

gunanamapyasau guna. This samabayinee sakti is Maha-

maya, over and above Maya. This Maya-sakti or Prakrita-

sakti has also been called "parigraha-sakti". The Panca-

ratra also recognises this twofold division of sakti. Swarupa

sakti of Lord Visnu has been called His samabayinee sakti.

The sakti of Visnu, which makes possible the creation of

the Universe, is His Maya-Sakti. This is charged with

three gunas, and is always undergoing transformations

(vide Ch. IV). The swarupa sakti, known also as Sama-

bayinee never obscures the nature of Parama Siva ; but

the maya sakti, which makes possible the creation of the

universe, is like the self-clouding of the unclouded nature

of Vibhu. This maya-sakti of Vibhu makes possible the

diverse manifestations of the samabayinee swarupa-bhuta

vimarsa-sakti as jnana, samkalpa and adhyabasaya (Iswara-

Pratyabhijna. I.5.18). This maya is the self-imposed limi-

tation of the infinite powers of Visnu. Samabayinee and

Parigraha saktis have sometimes been called different

manifestations of the same infinite reservoir of sakti. The

One Para Cid-sakti divides itself into "Mahasattva-

swabhava" and "Cinmatra-santa-swasabhava". This tranquil

sea of sakti next divides itself at one place in the manifest

form or bhava (sphitabhava), and at another place, as a

negation of manifest form, or abhava, as both sat and a-sat,

as the cause and controller at the same time, of the wide

and manifold universe. This is the second stage in the evo-

lution of sakti. In the third stage, like the appearance of

the waves on the surface of the sphita or turbulent sea,

there comes for the first time, the latent sakti, known as

parigraha sakti. The mode of Parama Siva, shrouded in

maya and its tendency towards manifestation, these consti-

tute Sadasiva-tattva or Iswara-tattva. Siva-tattva extends

beyond the domain of Maya ; Maya extends to the bottom

of self-expressive Siva (Commentary on Iswara-Pratya-

bhijna. 3.1.1.). Everything upto this Sada-siva-tattva is

prakrita. There is no Prakriti or Maya beyond this Sada-

siva stage. It is the realm of the aprakrita, or maya-tita

dhama. The great difference between the sakti-tattva in the

Panca-ratra and the sakti-tattva in Kasmir Saivism is that

while in Saivism the lila is always with swarupa-sakti in

the realms beyond maya or gunas, in the Panca-ratra, the

lila is always through the self-expression and self-retraction

for creation and destruction of this world. The cosmic crea-

tion is the result of His vibrant manifestation.

It should be clearly recognised that unless there had

been vimarsa, or sakti there would not have been any mani-

fest creation. This vimarsa or sakti is for the fulfilment of

the ends of purusa. These ends of the purusa are bhoga and

apavarga. But the apara purusa comes to experience bhoga

and apavarga, because of the reflection of buddhi in the

purusa. Bhoga or apavarga is always rooted in buddhi, and

the purusa even though he be a detached spectator, be-

comes an experiencer of bhoga and apavarga. Prakriti is

motivated with pravritti. The direct apprehension

( = साक्षात्कार) of pleasure and pain is bhoga ; but these can

never be of purusa. To attribute bhoga and apavarga to the

purusa would be to detract from the unattached cidrupattva

of the purusa. So the purusa has neither bhoga or apavarga,

or anything which the prakriti stands in need of. All

these are stationed in buddhi. The Samkhya teachers agree

that the purusa can have neither bhoga or apavarga. Just

as the purusa can be neither a bhokta, nor an abstainer, so

also the buddhi, which is jada, can neither enjoy nor again

renounce. For bhoga-apavarga are eminently the characters

of Cetana. The Samkhya does not recognise a third entity,

distinct from purusa and prakriti. So if bhoga and apavarga

be the character neither of cetana nor of jada, then accord-

ing to Samkhya analysis, bhoga and apavarga themselves

29 (OP 179)

204

would become irrelevant. But the Samkhya teachers hold

on the other hand, that the prakriti is prompted into pravritti

or activity, only to satisfy the bhoga-apavarga of the purusa.

They emphasize that though bhoga and apavarga are seated

in buddhi, these are attributed to the lord of the buddhi, the

purusa. Looked at from this standpoint, the experience

( =भोकृत्व ) of the purusa is only a reflected experience

( =आरोपित ). This experience (=भोकृत्व) really speaking, is

not in the buddhi, for buddhi is jada. The jada can never

be an experiencer. So if experience cannot be attributed

to any one, how can it be reflected in the purusa ? A thing

which is altogether illusory, cannot be reflected. The

Samkhya teachers recognise the validity of this argument.

For bhoga and apavarga really speaking belong to neither

prakriti nor purusa. But bhoga and apavarga are nevertheless

real, because of the timeless “aviveka” of buddhi and purusa.

The aviveka of buddhi and purusa means the ignorance of

the difference between the two. This results in attributing to

the purusa bhoga and apavarga. The purusa which is cit-

matra, kutastha, and of the nature of a perfectly pure self,

becomes impure because of this association with bhoga

arising out of avidya. If bhoga had been originally of the

purusa, there could never have been an end to it. But bhoga

being of the buddhi, and attributed to purusa, prakriti is

motivated to accomplish the nivritti or accomplishment of

attributed bhoga. Bhoga and apavarga of the buddhi can only

be attributed to purusa, when it is of the nature of aprakrita

visudha sattva. At this moment, the Kutastha purusa being

reflected in the buddhi, can experience aesthetic delight.

The Vedanta in formulating the doctrine of namarupa,

also recognises this standpoint. The Vedanta holds that

there is sound because there is ear ; there is sight because

there is eye. So grahaka precedes grahya. Things to be

perceived must of necessity come before perception. It is

useful to remember that Lankavatara-sutra (ed. by Suzuki.

p. 115) also recognises this opposition between grahya and

grahaka. It has already been noted that while grahya is of a

sattvic character, grahaka must necessarily be a little

tamasik, so that cognition might become possible. What is

to be remembered in this connection is this. Rasa-enjoyment

is essentially an enjoyment of the Visudda Sattva. While

at the moment of first cognition on the vibhava level, there

is a large admixture of Rajas and Tamas, at the moment of

205

Rasa-enjoyment, the soul has very largely got rid of these

two (See Ch. XI), though perfectly pure Sattva is unattain-

able in this life.

Bharata in taking.over the speculations of Patanjala

and Saktivadin Vedantists, looks at Rasa-realisation as

essentially of one who is Visuddha-Sattva. His use of the

words सुमनसः श्रेक्षका: : twice within five lines in Ch. 6,

points to the character of the audience who have already

become purified, and are visuddha-sattva. ‘Samānasa’ is also

one of the cardinal principles in "Dhammasangini". In

Abhidhamma philosophy, sevenfold purification is

recognised. The purification of character (sila visuddhi) is

followed by the purification of consciousness (citta visuddhi).

There are five other purifications which come after citta-

visuddhi. In Akusula citta, there cannot be either Somanassa

or Domanassa. They are essentially upekkhā-sahagata or

"accompanied by an ignorant indifference" (Abhidhamma

Philosophy ed. by Kasyapa. Bk. 1. Ch. 1. Sec. 9). The

Abhidhamma philosophy makes it clear that kusala vipaka

citta can be both upekkha sahagata, or somanassa-sahagata

(Abhidhamma Philosophy. Bk. 1. Ch. III. Sec. 4). Kusala

Vipaka Citta is the result of purification of the disturbing

elements, resulting from previous bad karmas. When Kusala

Vipaka Citta has come to stay, it is accompanied by

Somanassa. (Ibid. Bk. 1. Ch. III. Sec. 1).

This concept of Sattva-suddhi makes possible the

journey in the madhyama marga. It leans to neither of the

extremes. In keeping to the middle path, the soul is free,

unprejudiced and non-attached to either end. This by itself

is the result of a good deal of purification, for attachment

to either end is the beginning of impure existence. The

Gita in holding that balance or samata is the essence of

Brahma --- निर्दोष हि सम ब्रह्म ( सन्यास-योग १९ ) emphasizes

the Sattvic nature of godhead, where all duality has ceased,

and all oppositions are resolved.

III

The nature of this purification, which lies at the roots

of Rasa-realisation, remains yet to be discussed. The puri-

206

fication of bhavAs from the dominance of Rajas and Tamas,

and attainment of a contemplative attitude of mind are the

first requisites of Rasa-realisation. At the manomaya stage,

there is the conflict between Samkalpa and Vikalpa. This

Vikalpa-buddhi of the manas is the result of Rajas. The

subordination of Vikalpa and the emergence of Samkalpa

are essential before there can be any passage to the

Vijnanamaya stage. The mind is calm in Rasa-enjoyment.

With the attainment of this sobriety and tranquillisation of

all disturbances, there is a sense of delight. Purification

leads to a sort of balance. Unbalance in physical as also in

psychical world, gives rise to movement, which is the

beginning of sorrows. This unbalance in the psychical world

is the result of a sense of incompleteness. The mind is dis-

turbed, and so the soul which is activated by manas, is rest-

less ; and there is a feeling that something is yet to be

attained. Movement or endeavour is only to supplement this

deficiency. This movement itself proves that there is a full-

ness and completeness, which has yet to be attained.

(Vide Ch. IX).

In the Chandyogya Upanishad 7.24.1-2, it is said

सुमैव सुखम्। नाल्पे सुखमस्ति।

This bhuma is fullness, suffi-

ciency. A thing is sufficient unto itself, when there is

nothing to be added to it. At the core of all sense of pleasure

and delight, there is this realisation of a perfect balance or

harmony. When such a balance has been reached, there is

nothing to limit the enjoyment of the soul. There is a dis-

tension or vistara of mind. As there is more and more of

distension there is an approximation to laya. In Yoga-Sutra,

I. 18, when the citta is without any support, and rests in its

own self, and refuses to take in anything, then it is known

as samprajnata samadhi. This is the height of purification.

But in aesthetic enjoyment, purification cannot be carried

as far as this. The appreciator of a work of art in so far as

he enjoys the world of sight and sound, is on the plane of

samprajnata samadhi. In samprajnata samadhi, there might

be any of the four elements, vitarka, vicara, ananda and

asmita (Yoga-Sutra. I.17). It appears that in aesthetic

enjoyment, purification of both vitarka and vicara must be

carried out. The Patanjala analysis follows the Abhidhamma

analysis of Rupa-citta.

If purification be nothing but attainment of this samata

(vide Ch. IX), it would be of interest to examine this concept

207

of samata. The Samkara Bhasya in explaining निर्दोषं हि सम ब्रह्म (Gita : Sannyasa-yoga. 5 19), (138) writes, येषां साम्ये सर्वभूतेषु ब्रह्मणि समभावे स्थितं निश्लेषभूतं मनोऽन्तःकरणं निर्दोषम्‌ । यद्यपि दोषवत्सु श्वपाकादिषु मूढैस्तद्दोषैर्देव विभाव्यते तथापि तद्दोषैःस्थेमिति निर्दोषं दोषवर्जितम्‌ ।

The mind which is unprejudiced and not directed either to pleasure and pain, is pure. It has reached that stage, where it is free from all duality.

In Caraka-Samhita (Sarira Sthanam Ch. II), Sama or equality has been pointed out as the source of all physical and spiritual health.

दैवं पुरा यत्‌ कृतमुच्यते तत्‌ तत्‌ पौरुष यत्न्विहकर्म दृष्टम्‌ । प्रकृतिहेतुनुविषमः स दृष्टो निवृत्तिहेतुस्तु समः स एव ॥ 43

...

नरो हिताहारविहारसेवी समोक्ष्यकारो विषयेष्वसक्तः । दाता समं सत्यपरः क्षमावानश्रोपसेवी च भवत्यरोगः ॥ 45 (139)

Inequality or unbalance is the cause of all motivation, just as perfect equality is the source of complete detachment and annihilation of all desires. One who takes good and wholesome food (through all five indriyas) is unattached to objects of sense, and is generous, balanced, truthful and of a forgiving nature. In Sloka 39, Caraka writes,

प्रज्ञापराधो विषयास्तदर्थ हेतुस्त्रुतोःः परिणामकालः । सर्वामयानां त्रिविधा च शान्तिःप्रानार्थकाला: समयोगयुक्ता: ॥ (140)

This Sama-yoga applies equally to the bodily balance of vayu, pitta and kapha, as also to the mental balance of sattva, rajas and tamas. When this balance is upset, there is the beginning of creation in the physical world ; in the psychical world, there is at the same time, the uprising of bhavs. Caraka also recognises that when the mental balance has been reached, the sattva becomes purified.

शुद्रसत्वसमाधान्‌ सत्या वृद्धश्र नैष्ठिको । विचये पुरुषस्योका निष्ठा च परमर्षणा ॥ (Sarira 5.15) (141)

This state of purification continues only so long as the balance is maintained by samayoga. But this balance is upset by atiyoga, ayoga or mithyayoga. Men are thrown off this balanced state by any of these three yogas. Caraka discusses mithyayoga of sight and sound, the two forms of

208

ahara with which the dramatist is most immediately concerned. In Sutra-Sthanam. 11. 17, Caraka writes, अतिसूक्ष्म-

तिविप्रकृष्टौद्रैरववादनृतदृष्टवोमतसविकृतादिरूपदर्शनं मिथ्यायोगः। (142)

Speaking of mithyayoga of hearing, Caraka writes,

पुरुषेष्टविनाशोपधातप्रयर्षण भोषणादि शब्दं श्रवणं मिथ्यायोगः।

Of the mithyayoga of smell and taste, he says, पूतिदृष्टामेध्यक्रिन्नविष-

पानकुप्यादीनां ग्रहणं मिथ्यायोगः। ... ... मिथ्यायोगे रसिवर्जस्वाद्विहारोविघ-

विरोधायनेषूपदेक्ष्यते। (143)

Physical and mental disorders which impede the enjoyment

of pleasure are the results of three causes.

इत्यात्मेन्द्रियमर्थसंयोगः प्रज्ञापराधि: परिणमयेतिं त्रिविधाविकल्पा विकाराणाम्।

समयोगयुक्तस्तु प्रकृतिहेतवो भवन्ति। (144)

(Caraka, Sutra Sthanam. 11.22). Bharata takes into account

only the unbalance produced by असात्म्येन्द्रियार्थसंयोग; and only

two forms of it, the mithyayoga of sight and sound. The

artist like a good physician, should try to remedy the

unbalance produced by such असात्म्येन्द्रियार्थसंयोग

Later Alamkarikas with their scrupulous regard for figures of

speech and metrics, were laying down rules against any

असात्म्येन्द्रियार्थसंयोग which would work against the emergence

of discordant Rasas. The object of the good poet and the

dramatist was the evocation of proper Rasa through proper

and adequate means.

Caraka in emphasizing that prakriti is the result of

samayoga, and vikriti the result of visamayoga, is only

stating the Samkhya doctrine of creation. It should be clearly

recognised that in Rasa-realisation, there is a disappearance

of both Rajas and Tamas, leaving a surplus of Sattva. The

Visuddha Sattva of the audience is fed on this surplus of

Sattva. When there is this samayoga of sight and sound,

the manas rests on itself. The citta in Samkhya analysis at

the moment of perception, takes on the character of the

objects of sight and sound. The qualities of the sense

objects, their merits and defects are transmitted to the

citta. There is a peculiar character of the citta-sattva. It

retains the impressions of sense-objects, even when the

objects are no longer there. Dandin refers to how an antecedent thing retains its character in the mind of the audience

and is transmitted into vag-maya adarsa. This becomes

samskara or inhibitions.

209

The mind with its inhibitions and the objects of sense with varying elements of Sattva, Rajas and Tamas, are directed to different ends. The purification which takes place in Rasa-realisation, is the result of bringing together these two, the manas, working through the indriya, and the indriyartha. More generally, Rasa-realisation being the privilege of one who is visuddhasattva, the balance is reached between the Samskara of one Rasa and the Vibhava of its opposite Rasa, which is represented in poetry and drama (See Chs. X and XI). At this moment, the visuddha-sattva spectator goes on enjoying the bliss of aesthetic delight.

The Rasa-enjoyer is delivered from the illusory attraction and repulsion of sensible objects. Being and not-being are bound to the ebb and flow of breathing. This ebb and flow which rules breathing, as well as natural phenomena, is the very ground of the universe. Inspiration and expiration symbolise the world's dualism, the root of every imperfection. The Vajrayana aims at stopping the natural course of microcosmic forces by getting control of breathing, which represents the outward aspect of the vital energy. The initiate must master his own breathing, until it becomes the most responsive and subtle tool in his hand. He must employ it in order to disengage the innermost principle within him. The condition in which there are neither desires nor production of karma, marked by discriminative consciousness and by white and red breath-streams, is the deliverance consisting in the absence of karma production. By it, the diamond of the body is purified through the resolution of waking. By means of the numberless apparitional bodies that it throws forth, it leads to that path which is antithetical to moral defilement. Since it is absolute equilibrium, it is not spoiled by the passions (of which it takes the form) which appear as terrific, peaceful and lascivious deities. It is nirmanakaya consisting of sacred knowledge and instrument.

The meditation of the Yogin is accompanied by intensive exercises in the rhythm and control of breathing. Reaching the end of the great aevum, the yogin stops breathing and draws all his vital power inside himself, so that the irresistible stream of his energies diverted from its usual course is accumulated within himself and breaks down all spiritual obstructions. This is the yogic rebirth. The following quotation from Kalacakratantra will bear this out. "The birthplace of the Vanquishers is in one indefectible instant.

210

When the spirit is fixed in the potential breathing, the actual (outward) breathing extinguished, the divine perception awakened, the fleshly senses dead, the natural sensibility stopped, the divine spheres opened to my sight, then I see all, O Supreme King, there is nothing that I cannot perceive”. In the hierarchy of transcendent beings established by Mahayana, this stage corresponds to the “Vajrasattva”, the Being of Diamond, which is the ideal of this asceticism. The second degree is Mahasattva, and is possessed of the fivefold enlightenment, the third is Bodhisattva, the fourth Samayattva, or initiate. The twelvefold truth as well as the resolution of the twelve zodiacal signs are attributed to the Bodhisattva. In the Samayasattva, there is the suppression of all detracting elements.

As the individual begins his life from a drop or bindu, so God becomes at first manifest in a very point, which is neither immaterial nor material, and contains potentially all creation. The energies enclosed there are not allowed to spread (acyuta). It is Being itself (Svabhavika) without any subjective-objective correlation. It knows all because it comprehends all in a geometric point (bindu) and in one instant (ekaksana). So it is in creation. In the mystic ascension on the contrary it is the last and supreme stage ; to be more exact, it is both the first and the last step. Since the actual individual is the result of the natural Uptattikarma and the ultimate limit of distinction between subject and object if he desires to escape the bondages of life, he must reproduce in himself, in a condition of full awareness, the process that he has passively undergone. His aim is the breathing-control, and the attainment of instantaneous enlightenment. He strives to catch a glimpse of the divine consciousness (Samvit) and to reduce progressively the extent of the surrounding darkness by means of the aforesaid practice, in which inspiration means self-illumination (prakasa) and expiration reflection (vimarsa). Waking, as a perceptive condition, is day ; and dream, as a cognitive condition represents night. In sleep and catalepsy, day and night are reflected again. But the first two stages are mutually dependent, and in so far dualistic, whilst sleep is absolute prakasa, that is pure thought, and catalepsy, is absolute vimarsa, that is sheer suppression of even potential thought. In comprehending sleep and catalepsy, prakasa and vimarsa in one instant, the stand of Vajrayana is very similar to the analysis of the Pratyabhijna system. In this

union of prakasa and vimarsa, the Vajrayana was advocating the necessity of sakti which materialises in creation.*1

According to the Vajrayana, the sensible world is the body of God, who displays Himself without necessity, by pure goodness and grace for the sake of universal release.

Things are so far from being illusion that they are, ultimately, God Himself. Even when he has reached the highest summit, the ascetic keeps connection with the worldly things and beings, to which he owes the means of his way up, and of which he eagerly desires the deliverance.

He is inspired with karuna (compassion), the feeling of God towards creation ; he judges everything with upeksha, the unmovable equanimity and detachment to which he clings even when he identifies himself with various forms of God, such as the wrathful and passionate deities.

In a word, he has overcome every kind of dualism, as in his subtle bodily constitution, he has detached his life from the everlasting alternation of the twofold stream, inspiration and expiration, day and night, male and female—the root cause of all impurities (vide Ch. X).

The Samata or achievement of perfect balance which is at the core of the concept of purification, runs throughout the speculations of Indian philosophy.

Unfulfilled impulses or uncompleted cycles of activity are likely to leave a residium of unpleasant feelings and emotions.

This shows that feelings and emotions form a substratum to the whole series of overt trials, and to the internal and anticipatory processes which characterise the efforts to find the solution.

In other words, feelings and emotions are basic to all cycles of activity, and represent the fact that the organism remains in a state of disequilibrium, until the solution of the problem is at hand.

The fact that the mind looks for outside sense-impressions shows that the mind is not in a state of balance.

But the mind does not go out, and it develops a sense of aversion to outside world, when the mind has reached a balance within.

This concept of वाह्यवैमुख्यपाद as a result of the achievement of perfect internal balance or harmony, has been developed at length in Mammata's Kavyaprakasa.

*1Vajrayana accepts the Mahasukha theory (See Ch. X) and dilates upon the various stages of the development of Mahasukha, which according to Advayavajra, is not possible to attain without sakti, the embodiment of karuna.

30 (OP 779)

212

The inertia of our habitual patterns is all too evident, and it is always up to the individual to overcome this inertia in some way or other. The function of habits in our lives is primarily to do away with the faint vestige of spiritual growth. The core of every belief is prejudice. Swayed by emotions, we make an unjustified generalisation. Habits which prevent us from applying new knowledge, and beliefs which prevent us from acquiring new knowledge, impair our spiritual growth considerably. Only when the individual succeeds in overcoming his inertia, when he does not fall a prey to either habits or beliefs, to either adience or avoidance, he may safely walk the way towards enlightenment, which transcends all contraries. Liberation is not clinging to one of the contraries; this would not be samata (Vide Ch. IX). It is not the isolation of an allegedly immortal soul from the mortal human frame, but is the transfiguration of the whole man. When everything works flawlessly together, and attains the rhythm expressed in the ecstasy of bliss, wisdom and intensity of energy, man is liberated. He is not dissolved into nothingness, but he has become pure and transparent; he has become his own masterpiece. That man must pass beyond the struggle of drives, and must not have a predilection for any one, has been clearly expressed by Candrakirti, who states that.

"Those who try to solve the problem of life (bhavasya nihsaranam) either by perseverance (bhava) or by avoidance (vibhava) have no true knowledge. Both these aspects have to be given up, the adient drive (bhave trsna) as well as the avoidant drive (vibhave trsna)". (Madhyamikavritti).

Of this concept of purification as samata lies at the core of Samkhya-Patanjala, the Tantric and the Buddhist philosophy. On his way towards release, the disciple must go through four successive stages. In each of them, he becomes more and more free from the ties which bind human beings to the phenomenal life. These stages or vajrayogas are : visuddha, dharma, mantra, and samasthana yoga. In order to reach them one must have attained the "four deliverances" (vimoksha) which enable one to escape by means of meditation, from the conceptions and conditions of normal life. These vimokshas are : sunyata, animitta, apranihitta, and anabhisamskara vimoksha. They put human souls in full possession of the faculties inherent in each of the corresponding vajrayogas. These faculties are also four, and four are the methods of purification (brahmavihara) with

which the yogas are associated. Every vajrayoga leads the initiate to the perfection of one of the aforementioned faculties, and these perfections are styled vajra. So in the first vajrayoga, we have the Kayavajra, that is to say, “the diamond which is the body” or the yogis’ perfection of the material stage. Ultimately, it means the absoluteness of the physical sphere, in which we participate with our own body. In the second yoga, the perfection of the verbal sphere (Vag vajra) is attained. Cittavajra (mental perfection) and Jñanavajra (gnostic perfection) correspond to the third and fourth vajrayoga.

The Upanishadic tradition speaks of the four steps of perfection. They are designated by the same names as the natural conditions of the human being during day and night. Waking, dreaming, sleeping and catalepsy were assumed to symbolise four stages of mystic absorption to be reached through a gradual process of purification. The individual consciousness was darkened as in sleep, until at length it was drowned in the universal spirit, that is to say, it was identified with Atman.

Each stage of Vajrayoga is declared to be superior to the corresponding stage of the classification given by the Upanishads. The text runs : “The Catalepsy is still spoiled by the stains of ineradicable passions (which are the unconscious attachments to life, still present in man although in subtler form) ; the sleep is still darkened by tamas (the cosmic darkness of dead matter) ; in the dream, being and not-being are bound to the ebb and flow of breathing ; in the waking, there is discriminative consciousness.

“All existent things, since they do not exist as an independent reality, and lack of self-consistency, are void and their condition is unsubstantiality. Void are the past and the future. Becoming aware of this truth and meditating on it is the mental state, that is named voidness. This is deep and sublime. It is deep since it has no limits neither in space nor in time. It is sublime, because looking from it we see that the past and the future do not exist by themselves. The mystic knowledge that is grounded on it and marked by it is called “Voidness deliverance” (that is to say, that freedom which derives from having recognised that all things are voidness). Through it, the great Bliss, which having overcome the state of catalepsy is incorruptible, that is the Diamond of gnosis, endowed with universal charity, attains its utmost purity. It is the inborn Body,”

214

called also Visuddhayoga, or attainment of the absolute purity.

This first Vajrayoga is marked by the feeling of a universal charity. This is Karuna. As in Vajrayoga, each

upaya (instrument, male element), is the correlative of a prajna (wisdom, female element), so that wisdom which in its

subjective sense is Sunyata acts by means of that instrument which is Karuna. So in the Visuddha-yoga, there is this

union of opposites, male instrument and female wisdom, upaya and prajna (Vide Ch. X). Visuddha-yoga is visuddha

or pure, only because here all oppositions have been resolved. Tilopa in Mahamudra-Upadesa writes, "When the (intuitive)

knowledge of (the unity of) Bliss and Wisdom, which is without (worldly) attachment, rises, man's viability is

increased ; his hair will not become white ; and he will grow like the waxing moon".

This attainment of absolute purity was preceded in Mahayanic doctrine by a number of practices. Before pro-

ceeding further with the ceremony, the Master utters,

ॐ द्वादशाङ्गानिरोधकारिणे हुं फट्। alluding to the purification of the

twelve limbs, which will be performed by Vajrasattva. Then he makes the disciple turn around three times, and stops

him before the eastern door of the mandala. Then the Kabyanamitra, an assistant of the Master in the ceremonies,

like the Greek mystagogos, pours water on the disciple's head from a shell, uttering the threefold mantra, OM AH

HUM, and puts in his hand a flower which has been consecrated seven times by means of puspanjali. Other elaborate

ceremonies follow, and these are Sekas proper. The Sekoddesatika recognises four kinds of visuddhi, the first

three of which correspond to the threefold scheme of purification in Patanjali. These are kayavisuddhi, vagvisuddhi,

citta-vajravisuddhi and jnanavisuddhi in Sekoddesatika, while in Patanjala, these are kayavisuddhi, vagvisuddhi

and cittavisuddhi, showing thereby the great importance of the concept of purification in early Indian thought. It

should be noted that Bharata is very close to Patanjala and Abhidhamma positions (See Ch. VI).

"The achievement of perfect balance is the result of the meditation on something which is neither sunya nor its

opposite, nor a negation of the two. By the acceptance of Sunya or Asunya, numerous false constructions arise, and

in their abandonment, the determination comes in, therefore

215

both these should be given up. One should think himself as unchanging, absolute, aimless, stainless, and without a beginning or an end like the sky. The compassionate Bodhisattva should not neglect the beings nor should he think whether they exist or not. Prajna is so called because it does not admit of transformation, and krpa is so called, because it strives to do good to all beings like the Cintamani jewel. The prajna is absolute, krpa or compassion is absolute, much as the Purusa and the Prakriti are absolute in Samkhya analysis. Prajna and Krpa mingle together in cognition. When this commingling takes place, there is neither the Knower nor the Knowledge, nor the object of knowledge, and that is exactly what is called the highest knowledge. There is neither any doer, nor enjoyer and because it is free from the knowledge of either the doer or the enjoyer, it is called the knowledge of the great Truth. In this, there is no receiver, no giver, no object to be given nor to be received. Those who have realised this great truth, acquire innumerable attainments, even while doing ordinary things, such as, seeing, hearing, talking and eating, or when their attention is otherwise diverted. This is called non-duality, the Bodhi mind, thunderbolt or Vajrasattva or the enlightened one, or the enlightenment. This is called Prajna-paramita, the embodiment of all the Paramitas, or Samata or equality or the best object of meditation for all classes of the Buddhas. The ascetic should meditate on this, leaving aside the constructions of reality and non-reality, and whoever is able to cast off reality and non-reality attains perfection quickly.

Sakti as underlying the manifest and far-flung universe, is known in the Sakta Tantras as the Yoni. The Panca-ratra also speaks of the sakti of the Paramatman or Laksmi as the yoni of the universe (Ahirbudhnya. 59.7). This sakti, who is completely merged in Brahma is also kndwn as Tara, and sometimes as Hring (Ahirbudhnya. 51. 54-61). She removes (harati) all sufferings ; she is always worshipped (idiyate) by gods and demons ; she is the yard-stick (meeyate) by which the universe is measured. Har, I and Ma combine together to form Hring. Of the bhuti-sakti and the kriya-sakti of Visnu, the kriya sakti on awakening, assumes the form of nada. This parama-nada is like the long-drawn pealing of gongs. The parama-yogins alone can know this sakti in the form of parama nada. This nada is hardly manifest, like the bubbles at the bottom of the sea. The Yogins call this un-

216

manifest nada by the name of bindu. This bindu bifurcates

into two, as nama and namin. The Sabda-Brahman evolves,

centering about the emergence of nama ; the bhuti-sakti on

the other hand evolves, centering round the namin. The

bindu-mayi sakti of her own accord, takes on nama. This

nama, though unmanifest, divides itself into swara and

vyanjana varnas. This sakti, which is the mother of all

sabda, and is of the nature of soma, is the body of Laksmi,

made of sound. This is her "para" rupa. This "para" sakti

in the form of nada is Goddess Laksmi, residing in the

"muladhara padma" as Kundalini. From the "muladhara",

she on waking up, goes up with the dancing movement of

a courtsan (Ahirbudhnya. 16.55). This sakti in the form

of nada, next divides itself into sabda and artha, and goes

to dwell in the nabhi padma. It is then known as "pasyantee".

This same "pasyantee" then enters into "hrid-padma". At this

stage, this sakti becomes active in the form of vacya and

vacaka. This is referred to in the various Tantras as

"madhyama". After this, the sakti enters the throat, and

there is clear manifestation of the sounds of vowels and

consonants. This is the vaikharī rupa of nada (vide Ch. I

Sec. IV). Thus all letters, vowels and consonants alike, are

the result of the play of Visnu with Sakti. This Sakti of

Lord Visnu in the form of nada, shares in the nature of

Soma and Surrya (Vide Ch. X. Also Ahirbudhnya. 17.3).

The Sakta Tantras speak of the Kundalini as the store-

house of all sakti and energy. This sakti-swarupa Kundalini

is asleep in the muladhara. The unlimited energy of the

body and of the mind is dormant, so long as kundalini is

dormant and inactive. The awakening of the kundalini is

the goal of the sakti sadhaka. This is the repository of all

Sakti, infinite radiance, pulsation of infinite joy and delight.

The offerings of the worshipper, the dhauti-basti-trataka of

the Hatha yogi, the yoga of the ascetic are all directed

towards this awakening of the kundalini. The Tantrika

sadhaka also tries to awaken this kundalini. The Mahasakti

lies contracted ; this explains why kundalini is knotted all

over. The untying of these knots is the road to the realisa-

tion of sakti. The whole human frame is flushed up with

an extra-ordinary delight.

The sakti-sadhaka has not merely to awaken the

kundalini. He has to direct it further upwards from one

bodily cakra to another. As the kundalini moves, onward,

higher faculties, purer sensibilities, and suddha-sattva

217

become manifest. All sakti, all splendour and wealth, all magnificence are now concentrated in the sadhaka. This kundalini sakti after piercing the sat-cakra finally unites with Siva in the Sahasrasara. The union of Siva and Sakti, and their samarasya flood the body of the sadhaka. The sadhaka is immersed in a deep sea of delight and escapes from the world of divided aims and sorrows.

The sakti-sadhana of the Sadhakas is principally directed to bring himself closer to the primal store-house of sakti, embodied in the worship of Mother. This sakti-puja at the beginning is that of "pasu-bhava". This is of the nature of bhakti. Patience (dhairya), tolerance (sahisnuta), and will-power (icchasakti) are all the result of bhakti. Bhakti becomes firm and stable, with the practice of Virabhava. At this moment, there is the manifestation of alaukika sakti in the body of the sadhaka. The Tantrasara appropriately describes this stage as, hrdaya-granthi-bhedasca sarvavayava-vardhanam anandasrunı pulako deha-vesa kuleswari.

At this moment, bhakti is clearly manifest in certain characteristic symptoms of the body. The limbs become enlarged ; there are tears of delight and shivering sensation, accompanied with the manifestation of the magnificence of Unearthly Power. Extreme diminution in appearance (anima), extreme lightness (laghima), possession of everything (prapti) are all achieved. The sadhaka at his will can take possession of the entire universe. There is a simultaneous manifestation of cit-sakti in the sadhaka.

The siddhi of Divya-bhava is unique. His sadhana sakti is equally strange. He is firmly stationed in bhakti. Over and above, all the divya-bhavas of bhakti manifest themselves. It is sudipta sattvika bhava (vide Ch. VII). Shivering and tears, sweating and trembling all are clearly marked. He gets under control the splendours of anima and laghima. Slowly and steadily, a tranquil state of divya-bhava manifests itself. There is samadhi every now and then; there is a losing of the ego-centric self (atma-hara) again and again.

The sadhaka is flushed with the light of knowledge. Life becomes rhythmical with the rhythm of divya-chanda. The sadhaka looks at Brahma-mayı ; he himself becomes inseparable from Her. At this moment, he is perfectly calm and self-controlled, and is without any conflict. He is suddha-citta, and becomes parama-hamsa. The visuddha-sattva in Patanjala speculations, the visuddha-sattva is

218

Vedanta, the sakti-cult in Mahayana and other allied systems, and the kundalini in the sakta tantras, all speak of the necessity of the awakening of sakti in Rasa enjoyment.

The Sakta Tantras equally emphasize how sakti lies at the roots of perfect enjoyment. This Samata is to be achieved through a harmonious blending or union of opposites. Perfect balance is reached in the Sahasrasara. The Sahasrasara "well-concealed and attainable only with great effort, is that subtle "void" (sunya) which is the chief root of liberation" (Sat-cakra-nirupanam. V. 42). In Parama Siva are united two forms of Bliss (V. 42)—namely Rasa or Paramananda Rasa (that is the bliss of Moksha) and Virasa (or the bliss which is the product of the union of Siva and Sakti). It is from this latter union, there arise the universe, and the nectar which floods the lesser world (शुद्धब्रह्माण्ड) or the body.

The ascetic (Yati) of pure mind is instructed in the knowledge, by which he realises the unity of Jivatman and Paramatman" (V. 43). It is "that most excellent of men who has controlled his mind"—that is, concentrated the inner faculties (Antahkarana) or the Sahasrasara, and has known it—who is freed from rebirth:, and thus attains Moksha (V. 45). He becomes Jivanmukta, remaining only so long in the body as is necessary to work out the karma, the activity of which has already commenced just as a revolving wheel will yet run a little time after the cause of its revolution has ceased (V. 47). Rasa-realisation begins at the moment, when the cause of revolution has ceased to operate.

Rasa-enjoyment is of one, who is jivanmukta, or yuganaddha, or Samarasyā ; it is of one who has found the reality of both bhoga and apavarga, of abhijna and vimarsa, of prajna and upāya. The full implications of how this purification is to be arrived at, are to be discussed in Chapters IX andX.

Everywhere in Samkhya Patanjala, Vedanta, Pancaratra, Abhidhamma Samgraha, Saiva and Sakta branches of Indian philosophy, the attainment of a balance of opposite tendencies, leading to Samata, is the first step necessary for the purification of soul, or visuddha-sattva. The Vyasa-bhasya looks at God Himself as a purification par excellence

प्रकृष्टसत्त्वोपादानदीर्घरसस्य शास्त्रतैक उत्कर्षः (I. 24).

In Sadhana-pada, 52, the Vyasa-bhasya writes that the buddhi-sattva is all pervasive, all revealing. Vices like the avidya, and mental aberrations like attachment or avoidance cloud the infinite capacity and expressiveness of soul. When

219

the Yogin is an adept at pranayama, then all inhibitions like avidya are broken down. The mind with all its powers and faculties and expressiveness—all results of a purifica-

tory process—comes into play.

The concept of Visuddha-sattva beginning with Samkhya Patanjala, has deeply influenced Bharata’s Rasa-

speculations. Later Alamkarikas returned to this concept again and again. This is the common ground on which met

the speculations of Samkhya-Patanjala, Vedanta, Pancaratra, Saiva and Sakta branches of Indian philosophy. The

analyses of Mahayana and Hinayana also contributed to the evolution of this concept in Indian aesthetics. As late as eighteenth century, Kavi Karnapura reiterates Bharata’s

standpoint that Rasa enjoyment is of one, who is visuddha-

sattva. In Alamkara-Kaustabha 5.63, Karnapura writes,

आस्वादैकुरकन्दौष्ठि धर्मः कश्र्चन चेतसः ।

रजस्तमोभ्यां हीनस्य शुद्धसत्त्वतया सतः ॥

स स्थायी कध्यते विभ्रमैर्विभावस्य पृथक्‌कृतः ।

पृथग्विधत्वं यात्येष सामाजिकतया सत्यम्‌ ॥ (145)

It appears from the foregoing discussion of the essence of aesthetic enjoyment, that it is very different from worldly

enjoyment, which is always characterised by hankering and a lack of sufficiency (vide Ch. IX). Enjoyment in daily

life is always touched with sorrows and is sometimes clouded with stupor. The soul being impure, takes in whatever it

may come across ; but these āhara or vibhāva do not con-

tribute to detached aesthetic experience. Āhara on the plane of reality is for the satisfaction of our gross impure self.

It is attended with sorrows and distress. Āhara in the form of vibhāva in the world of art, undergoes a transformation

and a change. These are then the āhara of the visuddha sattva. The vibhāvas themselves help the impure Sattva to

attain this stage of purification. When once this state of purification has been reached, there is no bar or hindrance

to Rasa-enjoyment. Rasa-enjoyment is thus only the privi-

lege of Visuddha-sattva, a concept which has dominated Indian thought for more than two thousand years.

IV

The concept of purification was not peculiar to Hindu or Buddhist thought ; it also played a very important part

31 (OP 179)

220

in the evolution of thought in the middle east, as also in Greece. Aristotle's use of the word Katharsis in the Poetics

has to be read against the background of Greek religious thought, as also against the different branches of Greek

philosophy. In the tenth book of the Republic, when Plato had completed his final burning denunciation of Poetry, the

false Siren, the imitator of things which themselves are shadows, the ally of all that is low and weak in the soul

(θυμὸς and ἐπιθυμία) against that which is high and strong (λογιστικόν) who makes us feed the things we

ought to starve, and serve the things we ought to rule, he ends with a touch of compunction: "We will give her

champions, not poets themselves, but poet-lovers, an opportunity to make her defence in plain prose, and show that she

is not only sweet—as we well know—but also helpful to society, and the life of man, and we will listen in a

kindly spirit". Plato fears that the naturally impure and turbid soul of the spectator, with an excess of anger and

desire, would be made even more so by the representation of those emotions in tragedy. In the Republic 608a, Plato

is deeply concerned for the future of his ideal city. "This poetry is not to be taken seriously, as though it were a

solemn performance which had to do with truth, but that he who hears it, is to keep watch on it, fearful for the city

in his soul . . . For much is at stake, my dear Glaucon, more than people think, in a man's becoming good or bad;

and therefore he must not be seduced by honour or money, or any office, or even by poetry, to dare to neglect justice,

and the rest of virtue".

Plato was afraid that tragedy by feeding and watering the passions, which ought to be starved, was undermining

Justice had for reason (606a), and uprooting justice (608a). Justice had for Plato not merely the idea of what is right and proper. It

had for Plato also the idea of a perfect synthesis between all the discordant elements of the soul. Man is the end of

nature, and the Idea the end of man. Plato, like Antisthenes and the Cynics, finds the highest good,

not in pleasure (which is always touched with anger and desire), but in man's most perfect likeness to

God. Now, since God is the good or absolute Justice, we can resemble him only in justice. It is impossible, says

Plato (Theaetus. 176) that evils should pass away (for there must always remain something which is antagonistic to

221

good). Having no place among the gods in heaven, of necessity they hover around the mortal nature and this earthly sphere. Plato says we ought to fly away from earth to heaven as quickly as we can, and to fly away is to become like God, as far as this is possible. Now God is never in any way unrighteous ; he is perfect righteousness ; and he of us who is the most righteous, is most like him (Republic. 613). Justice is the fundamental virtue, the mother of the virtues belonging to each of the three souls. For the intelligence (=λoyos), it consists in the correctness of thought (=σοφια) ; for the will (=θυμος), in courage (=ανδρια) ; for the sensibility or appetite (επιθυμετιϰον) temperance (σωροσυνη). Wisdom is the justice of the mind, courage the justice of the heart ; temperance the justice of the senses. Piety is justice in our relation with the Deity ; it is synonymous with justice in general.

Man must be educated in order to attain justice, and through it to become like God. He can never realise this virtue in isolation. Justice, or the final goal of things, is realised only in the collective man or in the State. Plato's ideal state, like the individual, embraces three parts or separate classes : (1) the philosophers, who constitute the legislative and executive powers, the intelligence and the head of the State, or the ruling class ; (2) the warriors, who are the heart of the State, (3) the merchants, artisans, agriculturists, and slaves, or the servant class ; who correspond to the sensual soul, which is restricted to the lower parts of the human body. Wisdom belongs to the ruling class ; courage to the military class ; obedience to the two higher class, who think and fight for them, belongs to the labouring, commercial and serving classes. In order that the collective man or the State may form a real unity or an individual on the large scale, particular interests must be merged in the general interest, the family must be absrobed in the state, the individual must cease to be a proprietor.

Plato has discussed the concept of harmony among the opposites and even conflicting elements in the Symposium. In the Symposium, Eryximachus deals with the harmonious blending of different humours in man's constitution, in the course of the seasons, etc. in order to show that the same principle of order and balance manifests itself in the human body as well as in inanimate objects. Everywhere the blend-

ing of different elements leads to disorder or evil, if it

violates proportion ; this is vulgar love as opposed to per-

fect love. “The best physician is one who is able to separate

fair love from foul, or to convert one into the other ; and

if he is a skilful practitioner, he knows how to eradicate

and how to implement love whichever is required, and he

can reconcile the most hostile elements in the constitution

and make them friends. Now the most hostile are the most

opposite, such as hot and cold, moist and dry, bitter and

sweet, and the like. And my ancestor, Asclepius, knowing

how to implant friendship and accord in these elements, was

the creator of our art … The course of the seasons

is also full of both principles, and when, as I was saying,

the elements of hot and cold, moist and dry, attain the

harmonious love of one another and blend in temperance

and harmony, they bring to man, animals and vegetables,

health and wealth, and do them no harm, whereas the

wantonness and overbearingness of the other love affecting

the seasons, is a great injurer and destroyer, and is the

source of Pestilence”

Reality according to Plato, does not belong to objects

of sense (or phenomena), but to the Ideas or types which

these objects reproduce, and which are perceived by reason

(or noumena). The phenomenon is real only in so far as it

partakes of the ideal type of which it is a copy. The highest

idea, which is to the world of invisible realities what the

sun is to the phenomenal universe, is the Good or absolute

Goodness, the first and final cause of all beings, and conse-

quently superior and anterior to being itself, which it

creates by natural radiation.

This ontology may be defined as the monism of the

good. The good is the universal principle. The Good, the

True and the Beautiful are different aspects of the same

reality. Plato regards the phenomenon as changing, the law

as stable and therefore more real than the particulars. The

mistake does not lie in exalting the universal over the parti-

cular ; it consists in separating the former from the latter

metaphysically, and in making a transcendent entity of the

genus or type ; it does not consist in exalting nous over

perception, but in making two separate and even incom-

patible principles of them. In themselves, the type and the

individual which realises it, the law and the phenomenon

which is application, are but one and the same reality, con-

sidered from different points of view ; observation and

reasoning are merely two stages of one and the same method. The universal must be derived from the particular, because it cannot be found anywhere else. Plato failed to escape the illusion that the idea is something separate, real and transcendent. He falls into the error of the separstistic conception.

Plato tries to get over the difficulty by his doctrine of participation. The Platonic doctrine of participation is strikingly similar to the standpoint of Saiva philosophy. Matter, according to Plotinus, is formless, incorporeal and chaotic. Reason cannot comprehend it, except as indefiniteness. It can have no magnitude or bulk. "It is, however, a void bulk . . . . The indefiniteness of it, likewise, is a bulk of this kind". Into this "void bulk", which according to ordinary imagery, would be the crevices or fissures in a solid object, the so-called rays of beauty fit themselves, and these then irradiate, beautify or rationalise matter by combining its parts into a complete whole. "It is by participation of species that we call every sensible object beautiful . . . . Whatever is entirely remote from this immortal source is perfectly base and deformed. And such is matter, which by its nature is ever averse from the supervening irradiations of forms. Whenever, therefore, form accedes, it conciliates in amicable unity the parts which are about to compose a whole; for being itself one, it is not wonderful that the subject of its power should tend to unity, as far as the nature of a compound will admit. Hence beauty is established in multitude when the many is reduced into one". (An Essay on the Beautiful—Plotinus).

The undiversified pulsation and glow of the Good, or the Beautiful has its existence in the world of the nous. If such a hypothesis had been pressed, creation would become meaningless. Creation would be the overflowing of the Idea, as it were, and the generation of being, that is, according to Plato, of spiritual being, thought or intelligence, for the being which comes from the Idea must resemble it as the son resembles his mother. Being, in the real and absolute sense of term, and being-mind (thought) are one and the same thing, from this point of view, the difference between Being and being-mind is the same as the difference between Saktiman and Sakti, as analysed in Saiva and Sakta philosophy. A rational explanation of the world would recognise it as a mixture of being and non-being, of spirituality and corporality, of good and evil.

224

Whence comes this second constitutive element of the phenomena, this non-being? From the Idea? Impossible. The

Idea can create nothing but Being, intelligence and goodness. Hence a second principle that is co-eternal with the

Idea must have participated in the creation of the world;

Plato's monism of Good becomes a dualism of Idea and

matter. By coming in contact with the latter, the Idea or

rather intelligence its offspring, is polluted, diminished and

impoverished.

Intelligence according to Plato, must consider matter

as its natural enemy, as the chief cause of its diminution, as

the seat and principle of evil; the mind will, of course,

desire to be freed, as soon as possible, from the body which

holds it in bondage, and from the visible world, which is a

prison, a place of correction. The Utopian system of politics,

which sacrifices nature to an abstract principle, asceticism,

monachism, the horror of matter which is to be found among

the Neo-Platonists, the Gnostics, and even Catholics, all

these elements are the logical consequences of a concep-tion that makes the Idea a reality.

The transition from Idea to being, from metaphysics

to physics, is not easy for Plato. If the Idea is self-suffi-cient, and if the intelligible world is a system of perfect

being, what is the use of a sensible reality, that must of

necessity be imperfect, alongside of the Idea? What is the

use of a material world that is inevitably doomed to evil?

The real world is evidently as great a source of trouble to

Plato as it was to Parmenides. It cannot be explained by

the Idea alone, but presupposes a second principle, which

is no less real than mind: matter; to assume the reality of

the sensible world would be to abandon the absolute monism

of the Idea; to confess that the Idea constitutes only a part

of reality, would be to make concessions to sensualism and

materialism. And yet the sensible world exists; it is an

undeniable and stubborn fact that has to be explained. Plato

finds the key to the answer in the conception of divine good-ness; this enables his thought to pass from the ideal to the

real (Timaeus, 29e).

Inasmuch as the Idea is the only reality, there is

nothing outside of it but non-being. But in so far as it is

the highest reality, it is also the highest activity, the being

that communicates itself to non-being. Hence, the Idea

becomes a creator, a cause, a will, or a plastic principle in

reference to non-being; so that non-being in turn becomes