126. ABHINAVAGUPTA'S THEORY OF ÆSTHETICS 145

ABHINAVAGUPTA'S THEORY OF ÆSTHETICS 145

of the representation, that is, what the actor does when he represents an historical character. Does he imitate ? Is the dramatic presentation an imitation of the rea! ? To answer this question let us consider the nature and the constituents of imitation. (i) It presupposes a knowledge of the original. (ii) It is always a partial representation of the original i. e. it lacks the essential or spiritual elements of the imitated.

(iii) The most successful imitation at its best is only an illusion, so that the knowledge of it that we get at first sight is contradicted by a subsequent one on closer observation. (iv) When one human being imitates another, the former is aware of the latter as totally distinct from himself. Hence the imitator can never succeed in completely repro- ducing in himself the mental states of the original. If we accept this view of imitation as correct, we cannot maintain the dramatic presentation to be an imita- tion.1 Firstly : the actor can never have the direct know- ledge of the historic person that he represents, because of his being too far removed from the latter in time. His acting at best is based upon what in itself is a representation, namely, the acting of the predecessors. Secondly: the æsthetic object is a configuration of all the essentials of the emotive life, the emotive situation, the mimetic changes, the transient emotions and the basic mental state. But the idea of imitation implies lack of inner essence. For, one, who imitates, is an imitator only if he lacks the spirit of the character whose external look he assumes. Hence the actor cannot :be said to be imitating an historic person, because he does not lack the spiritual 1. A. Bh. Vol. 1. 3. 19