33. 36 CHAPTER I 1

36 CHAPTER I 1

kuka's criticism is based on them. In short, the criticism is due to the confusion of the dramaturgic point of view with the philosophic.

/ANOTHER OBJECTION TO BHATTA LOLLATA'S THEORY. Another objection that Srīsankuka brings against Bhatta Lollata's interpretation of the Rasa Sutra of Bharata, refers to the distinction that the latter draws between Sthayibhava and Rasa. We know that, according to him, the very Sthayibhava becomes Rasa,1 when it is developed by Vibhāva, Anubhāva and Vyabhicāribhāva. The objec- tion is that if development be responsible for converting Sthayibhava into Rasa, there being innumerable stages in the development, there would be innumerable variety of each Sthayibhava. Thus it would be absurd on the part of Bharata2 (i) to talk of only six types of Hāsya : for, who can deny the innumerability of stages of Hasya or for that matter of anything that grows and (ii) to maintain Śrngāra to be of two types only (1) Sambhoga and (2) Vipralambha, when he himself, following the authority of Kāmasūtra, enumerates ten stages of Vipralambha Srngara; for, these stages being sub-divisible into further stages, it would be not of two or ten but of innumerable types. Even if Bhatta Lollata be admitted to hold that only the highest stage in the development of Sthayin is Rasa, the objection, that Śrīśańkuka raises against him, is that in that case Karuna Rasa shall have to be rejected. For, its basic emotion, the grief, (soka) by its very nature is such that it is most intense only in its first stage and diminishes with the passage of time. Therefore, the talk of developing it to the highest pitch and thus converting it into Rasa is out of question.

1. A. Bh. Vol. 1. 274. (2) A. Bh. Vol. I, 315-6.