178. 200 CHAPTER III

200 CHAPTER III

level so is not the pure Self. Even that indeterminate experience of the Self, that a Yogin has after the rise from Samadhi, is not altogether free from all kinds of affection. It is, however, unimportant to discuss this question here. For, even if we accept the Self in its purity as experience- able at the empirical level, it does not affect our position. Bharata1 in his enumeration of the basic permanent states of the mind does not mention all such mental states as can possibly be represented as permanent, because all of them are not necessary in the rise of the accepted types of the æsthetic experience. His object in mentioning them separately as Sthayins is only this that they may not be misconceived as definable in terms of the definition of the Vyabhicarin. In the case of the Sama however, there is no possibility of such a misconception. Hence it is not included in the general list of Sthayins. This justifies the text of Bharata which mentions the Bhavas to be forty-nine.

WHY DOES BHARATA USE THE WORD SAMA AND NOT TATTVAJÑĀNA ? As2 to the question why does Bharata substitute Sama for Tattvajnana as the Sthayin of Santa, his reply is that it is not because there is the possibility of the pure Self being looked upon as transient, nor because it is incapable of giving rise to distinct æsthetic experience, nor even because it is not fit to be presented as Sthayin ; but because he wants to point out that Sama is not a distinct state of mind, but the Self itself.

The case with the word 'Nirveda' is, however, diffe- rent. In the context of Santa Nirveda cannot be similar in its nature to that which arises from such a distinct situation as poverty. And only that which is similar in nature to the 1. A. Bh., Vol. I, 337. 2. A. Bh., Vol. 1, 338.