20. HISTORY OF INDIAN ÆSTHETICS 23

HISTORY OF INDIAN ÆSTHETICS 23

united together in due proportion by a poetic genius that they present something that is quite different from what each one of them is separately. It may be pointed out here that Bharata does not mention "Sthayin" in his aphoristic definition of Rasa. Nor does he mention in his analogy the thing that corres- ponds to Sthayin. This omission has been interpreted by different commentators in their own ways. We shall discuss this point in proper context. ÆSTHETIC OBJECT NOT AN IMITATION. The constituents of the asthetic configuration are not the products of nature:1 they are the creations of art, which does not imitate nature, but reproduces, in all possible details, a poetic vision. Kaverantargatam bhāvam Bhāvayan bhava ucyate. N. S. 79 Trailokyasyāsya sarvasya Nāțyam bhāvānukīrtanam. N. S., 8. The constituents should be presented not in the actual historical setting, but as perfectly free from all elements of historical reality. This is the point, which Bharata has emphasised in the reply, that he has put in the mouth of Brahma, to pacify the demons, enraged at the presentation of their fall in the first dramatic performance. Naikāntatotra bhavatām Devānām Cānubhāvanam. N. S., 8, The æsthetic object is not a product of imitation, if the word imitation implies the production of a mere 1. A. Bh. Vol. I, 292.