46. HISTORY OF INDIAN ÆSTHETICS 49

HISTORY OF INDIAN ÆSTHETICS 49

that the word "Sthayin", if it had been used by Bharata, would have been put in a different case from that of vibhava etc. For, while the latter would have been in oblative case, the former would have been in the genitive. But inspite of the1 different case, in which it was to be used, and consequent necessity of using it, he omits it altogether. The omission is not without its significance. It implies that, according to Bharata, Sthāyin, as a content of spectator's consciousness, appeared in a cogni- tive form different from that of vibhava etc. The latter are known through direct perception, but the former is a matter of inference only.

Thus, according to this theory, the basic mental2 state is known through inference only. But this inference may be called erroneous inasmuch as the basic mental state does not exist in the imitating actor. The asthetic experience, however, results from it exactly as does fear from a rope mistaken for a serpent.

NATURE OF THE INFERENTIAL JUDGEMENT.

The judgement is reached through inference. There- fore, both the place where the thing is inferred and the thing itself figure in the judgement. Further, the judge- ment: tends to be of recognitive nature. Naturally, therefore, both the imitated and the imitating figure in it. In the case of inference of love from imitative presentation on the stage, the form of judgement, therefore, tends to be "that happy being (e. g. Rama) is this".

We have given in a previous section the Nyaya view of recognition. It is qualified perception. It is fusion of two images, the one stimulated by the stage-presentation

1. A. Bh., Vol. I., 275. 2. A. Bh. Vol. I. 275.