368. 370 HISTORY OF SANSKRIT POETICS

370 HISTORY OF SANSKRIT POETICS

the views of these writers and the objections raised against them. I shall briefly indicate the special characteristics of the theory of early writers on the question of rasa realization. The important questions are : 'where does rasa reside',1 'what the nature of rasa is' and 'how it is evolved and realized'. Briefly put, Lollata's view is as follows: Rasa in the primary sense belongs to the hero, Rāma etc. (i. e. Rāma loves Sītā and the dramatist describes this love in appropriate words). The spectator ascribes to the actor, on account of the latter's clever acting, the same mental attitude that belonged to Rama and the spectator's apprehension of imputed love in the actor brings to him delight. This is the meaning of the words विभावा ... रसनिष्पत्तिः This view does not treat of rasa as a matter of the spectator's aesthetic appreciation of the inner meaning of the representation. All that Lollata means is that the spectator is delighted by the fact that the actor cleverly represents by his acting that he is Rāma himself, feels the same love that the historic or legendary person (Rama) felt towards the heroine. The spectator is charmed by this. The view of Lollata is not very clearly expressed by faa or by मम्मट (तेन स्थाय्येव विभावानुभावादिभिरुपचितो रसः। स्थायी भवत्यनुपचितः। स चोभयोरपि मुख्यया वृन्या रामादावनुकार्येऽनुकतरि च नटे रामादिरूपतानुसन्धान- बलादिति। अ. भा. vol. I p. 274; रसस्वरूप एव तावद्विप्रतिपत्तयः प्रतिवादिनाम्। तथा हि पूर्वावस्थायां यः स्थायी स एव व्यभिचारिसम्पातादिना प्राप्तपरिपोषोऽनुकायगत एव रसः। लोचन p. 83; नटे तु तुल्यरूपतानुसन्धानवशादारोप्यमाण: सामाजिकाना चमत्कारहेतुः । प्रदीप p. 74 on काव्यप्र. 4. 5-6). Here real रस (शङ्गार) is produced in ₹TH and therefore this view is called erufoare. ₹Te3i thinks that rasa is a matter of inference. The actor who has been well trained in the art of gesticulation cleverly simulates the actions of real heroes and the spectator appre- hends for the moment the actor as non-different from the real hero and infers love (of Rama etc.) from the अनुभावs, व्यभिचारि- aTras presented by the actor and mentally contemplates such love and relishes it. Here rasa is no doubt spoken of in rela-

1. It should be noted that as said by Tota (p. 211 above) the original hero, the dramatist or the poet who composes his work and the spectator or reader pass through the same ex- perience. The actor is only simulating but some writers say that there is nothing to prevent the actor also from relishiag rasa.