166. 186 CHAPTER III

186 CHAPTER III

the presentation of Vipralambha Srngara. This makes it clear that Bharata intended all the Bhavas to be used as either Sthayin or Vyabhicarin. Hence there can be no textual objection to presenting Nirveda as a Sthāyin.

That Nirveda, which is due to the realisation of the Ultimate, is more permanent than the directly mentioned eight Sthayins, because it is capable of driving them all away. How could it do so unless it were more permanent than the accepted Sthayins, as has just been stated ? ITS CRITICISM.

According to those who hold that Nirveda, due to the realisation of the Ultimate, is the Sthayin of Santa, the realisation of the Ultimate should be the Vibhava of Santa and not the causes of Vairagya, as pointed out in Y. S. 1-15. (Drstanuśravika vişaya vitrsņasya vaśīkārasarjnā vairā- gyam) For, the causality of Vairāgyabija to Nirveda is indirect and admission of the indirect cause as Vibhava will make the conception too wide. And even if the realisation of the Ultimate be accepted to be the cause of Santa Rasa, it would cease to be presentable, because its situation, the realisation of the Ultimate, is unpresentable. Further, the causal relation between Nirveda and Tattva Jnana has been totally misconceived. For, what is Nirveda after all ? Is it not complete indifference to all the worldly objects ? If so, it is rather the cause of Tattva jñana, the chief characteristic of which is the freedom from all attachments. For, a person, who is free from all attachments, makes such efforts as lead him to the reali- sation of the Ultimate which is responsible for liberation. It is never the case that a person realises the Ultimate first and then comes to the realisation of the futility of pursuit of all worldly objects, which ultimately leads to liberation.