25. 28 CHAPTER 1T0 021

28 CHAPTER 1T0 021

with the personality in the focus of the spectator's attention and consists in consequently having identical experience. This is exactly what Abhinava maintains. Thus, we find Abhinava to be more faithful to Bharata in his exposition of the æsthetic theory than any other commentator of the Nāțya Šāstra. COMMENTATORS ON THE NĀTYA SĀSTRA There was quite a large number of commentaries on the Națya Sastra of Bharata. But all of them are unfortunately lost, excepting the Abhinava Bharatī of Abhinavagupta. In' fact, our only source of information about them and their authors is the Abhinava Bharatr itself. For the available information about them the reader may refer to pages 120 to 129 of Abhinavagupta : An Historical And Philosophical Study. From the point of view of our present undertaking. the presentation of Indian Æsthetics, besides Abhinava- gupta, there are only three commentators (i) Bhatta Lollata (ii) Śrī Śańkuka and (iii) BhatțaNāyaka, who are important. For, their theories have been presented by Abhinavagupta at some length in the course of his exposition of Bharata's aphoristic definition of Rasa. BHATTA LOLLAȚA'S PRACTICAL POINT OF VIEW We have discussed the date of Bhatta Lollata in an earlier work.1* He was a contemporary of Bhatta Kallata, the author or publisher of the Spanda Karika. He commented not only on Bharata's Natya Sastra but also on the Spanda Karika. He, therefore, inherited both the dramaturgic and the philosophical traditions from his predecessors. In interpreting him we have to keep this fact in mind. There are two places where Bhatta Lollata'sinterpretation of the aphoristic definition, of Rasa Sūtra, is given. (1) Abhi- 1 *. Abh. 126-9.