35. 38 CHAPTER 1

38 CHAPTER 1

some western æstheticians also. We shall deal with this theory of western æsthetics in the second volume. He is the first writer to point out the difference between Rasa as an æsthetic object on the stage and Rasa as an æsthetic representation in the spectator's consciousness, and to account for the latter. According to Bharata, constituents of Rasa, whether in the hero of the piece on the stage or in the spectator, are the same; for, he uses the same word without pointing out any distinction. Sankuka's problem, therefore, was: how does a complete æsthetic representation arise in the spectator ? For, the basic mental state is a purely mental state and as such it cannot be cognised in the same manner as other constitu- ents of the æsthetic object. He, therefore, put forward the theory of inference. According to him, the basic mental state is inferred from the situation etc., which are directly perceived, much as fire, hidden in a cluster of trees at the top of a mountain, is inferred from the rising smoke. But the basic mental state in the actor is a matter of indirect imitation. For, while other constituents of æsthetic object can be presented very clearly by the actor ; the situation, for instance, through vivid poetic1 description, mimetic changes because of their display through training and transient emotion by somehow reviving one's own past experiences; the basic mental state cannot be presented by any of these means. And because it is a matter of indirect imitation, therefore, it is given a different name, Rasa, to signify the fact of indirect imitation. His theory may briefly be stated as follows :- The scenic arrangements together with skilful acting give rise to the consciousness of identity of the actor with the hero, he impersonates. This consciousness is not of the 1. A. Bh., Vol. I. 274.