Literary Theory & Criticism

Name                  :        Gohil HetalbaI.

Std                       :        M.A. I        Sem :          II

Roll No.              :        8

Topic                   :        Literary Theory & Criticism

Papers                :        Paper No.  7 

Submitted To     :        Dr. Dilip Barad

                                      Department of English M.K. Bhavnagar

University

Rasa Theory

          Indian ancient criticism was a mildestone in itself. Ancient criticism is rich and beyond comparison. The vedic texts annauced that the poets were “gods”. They projected the term ‘kavi’ for the poets. A human being could become poet only in so far as he attained to the nature and status of a god. The poet was the seer of truth having a subtle, profound and penetrating, consciousness. He was a creator or maker, the builder, fashioner and lastly he embodied the principle of delight( ) He saw the principle of beauty in all things and was filled with utter ecstasy and raised the earth to the level of Heaven. The vedic conception of a poet took into account all aspects of poetry its creation, its manifestation and its impact upon the reader The vedic kavi was also yogi and ‘Jagrat’ (the waking state), the Upanishads spoke of subtler states such as (swapna) the dream state(susupti) deep sleep and (turiya) the transcendental state not mention infraconscious levels. He could also see objectively what he has created and evaluate it.

          Every vedic scholar who has learnt his traditional way would talk about the importance of ‘swera’ and how it determines the meaning. The critic is one who is capable of ‘                ’. Bharata was the first art critic to define ‘          ’ for us the literary Theories are classified into-

1)                Language namely ‘alankara’ and ‘vakroti’(principle of figuratweness & principle of deviation)

2)                Style and compositional value, namely, ‘gunaf dosa’ (excellence faults) ‘riti’ (made of expression), and ‘aucitya’ (proproety)

3)                Verbal symbolism, namely, ‘dhvani’

4)                Aesthetic experience namely, ‘rasa’

5)                Narrative, namely mahavakya

6)                Discourse analysis namely, yukties

7)                Comprehensive analysis

‘Rasa’ Theory has its arigin in the Natyasastra of Bharata. ‘Rasa’ claims the object or meaning should be conveyed in literary composition and it’s nature should have an emotional effect. It has diverse human experience on man’s heart and mind.

          Bharata demonstrates to enumerate the whole rangte of emotions, or states of being born of experience and to analyse the structure emotions as cause, physical correlate(effect) and their effect on man’s being. Thus ‘Rasa’ can be said to be a theory of literary experience. Bharata gave the analysis of its sources, nature and its categoeies Dhanika-Dhananjaya reexamined Bharata’s typology of drama and added to it a typology of ‘uparupakas’ subplays, plays within plays, and one-act plays.abhinava gupta enriched this theary by elucidating its philosophic foundations and by analyzing, it in depth the aesthetics in terms of nature, cognition and effect of literary experience.

          The ‘Rasa’ theory has been accepted as the core literary theory by all mayor pacticians both before and after Abhinavgupta. Pt.jaganath and viswanatha also contributed to Rasa Theory.

          ‘Rasa’is said to arise when the athayibhava in the individual is awakened by his peaception of the vibhavasanubhavas, vyabhicaribhawas and sattuic bhawas.

          Vibhava is the stimuli like the story, the stage and the actors responsible for the awakening og the sthayi The vibhavas are of two kinds

(1)             Alambana vibhave

It is the basic stimulus that is capable of arousing the sentiment, whereas

(2)              Uddipana vaibhava is the enhacing stimuli, the environment in which the basic stimulus is located.

In case of arousing the sentiment of pity or ‘karuna rasa’, the perception of an old weak woman on the stage is called alambana vibhava and the thatched hut in which the old woman is being and the atmosphere around is of negbct and poverty can be rightly called ‘uddipana’ vibhava.

Yet it is important to note that vibhava is not the ‘cause’ of proelucing  any emotin but only the mealium by which pases to spectator by means of sympathetic induction This way in aesthetic concition of induction, everything is a medium and not a cause and it so happens because what is transferred is always a generalired feeling which can neither be called result nor it can be called a knowledge. This change implies not the production of any new emotion in the spectator but not only the awakening of ‘latent’ sentiment

‘Anubhava’ is the deliberate manifestations’ of feelings on the part of the actor. They include various gestures and glances of the actor which are intended to develop the basic stimulus or the vibhava.

          ‘Vyabhicaribhavas’ are the transient emotions arising in the cause of maintaining and developing the baisic mood they are the ancillary emotions which are determined by the baisic emotions  and vyabhicaribhavas in turn reinforces the basic mood.

    If the basic mood is love, ‘riti’ joy in union and anguish in separation will be the accompanying ancillary emotions.

     Sattvic bhava are the involuntary expressions such as blushing, perspiration tec. Which arise as a result of experiencing and portrayal of the emotion.

          When all the above factors join the sthajibhava is aroused in the spectator thata becomes ‘Rasa’, it actually develops into ‘rasa’ when it is aroused and brought to a relishable condition as a result of the complex stimuli ‘Rasa’ arises as a consequence of all these factors is distinct from all of them as a dish is distinct in taste from each of its ingredients.

·                   Process of rasanubhava by Abhinavagupta

Abhinavagupta believes that grasping the full significance of the words and their meanings there is a mental intuition as a result of which the actual temporal and spatial character of the situation is withdrown from the mental field and the emotion suggested there in toses its individual character which becomes dissociated from such condition as might have led is to any motivation. Pathological results are always due to a sense of self struggle, self-emotivation, loss and son on. In Rasa, we live through the experience of pure sentiment bereft of all its loval characters and personal emotive associations in the subconscious and unconscious regions there are always complexities. When through artistic creation a purely universal emotional fear armour, etc, are projected in the mind they become affiliated or appereception or implicit recognition of identity immediately changes the artistic joy there is a kinship and identity among all art-enjoyers.

    Abhinavagupta’s teacher Bhatta Tauta in ‘Kawya-kawluka says that a dramatic play is not a physical occurrences. The man who plays Rama’s role does not appear to us that he cannot be the same ‘Rama’ about valmike wrote. He stands somewhere midway between the pure actuality and the pure ideality. Revealing new types of pleasures and pains, unlike those associated with our egoistic instincts and the success or failures of their strivings. “This is teachnically called Rasasvadance, camatkaara , carvana which literally means the ‘experiencing of a transcendent exhilaration’ from the enjoyment of the roused emotions inherent in our own personality”

                   The ‘rasa’ theary has been accepted as the core literary theory by all major poeticians both before and after Abhinavagupta. Anandvardhana integrates ‘rasa’ theory with his ‘dhvane’ theory. “Dhucine” is the method, the means for achieving or evoking ‘rasa’ which is the effect of suggestion.

  ‘Rasa’ is the constant aesthetic pleasure in all literature its divisions are based on sthayibhavas  which evoke the rasas, states of mind. The ‘rasa’ is a state or condition produced in the spectator a single feeling and a pleasurable one. Bharata’s Natyasastra-‘rasasutra vibhavanubhava vyabhicari samyogada rasanispatti’ has been interpreted in a different way from the different point of view-

(1)             Who is the sabstratium(asraya) of ‘rasa’.

(2)             Have it is experienced

There are various opinions on ‘rasa’. It is ungiven that ‘rasa’ exists in the heroine(Lollata)

                             Also it is suggested that the experience of “Rasa” is a matter of inference (sankuka). Bhattanayaka cleary depicted that ‘rasa is experienced by the spectator, that it is the spectator’s aesthetic experience that the enjoyment of ‘rasa’ is a subjective experience. Bhattanayaka differentiated poetic language from ordinary language the poetic language besides abhidha, primary meaning has two other functions

(1)             Bhavakatha univer satization or stripping ‘vibhava’ and ‘sthayibhava’ of individuall and personal aspects, is the abstraction of the emotion , by the spectator from its immediate location and context.

(2)             Bhayakatva-tasting or experiencing the emotion in one’s self-consuning for one self the emotion represented in the performance text.

          There are three stages in the realization of ‘rasa’ in literature accordingly are-

(a)Cognition of the forman, intellectual elements of the poem means to the second stage

(b)Idealisation of things in poetry or drama by the power of imagination in the reader/spectator.

          (c) intensification of the inexpressible effective emotional condition of the reader/ spectator

                    The eight rhetorical sentiments(Rasas) recognized in drama and dramatic representation are

(1)             Erotic

(2)             Comic

(3)             Pathetic

(4)             Furious

(5)             Heroic

(6)             Terrible

(7)             Odious

(8)             Marvelous

                    The high-sauled Druhina(Brahima) proclaimed the above rhetorical sentiments.

Bhava & Rasa

Bhava and Rasa are the emotional states turned out from the rhetorical sentiments(raras) or it may be opposite. It is a matter of actual perception that the rhetorical sentiments are turned out of the emotional states and not that emotional states are turned out of the sentiments. There are traditional couplets about this.

“The emotional states are known by the designers of the dramatic art because they (the bhavas) bring to the spectators an emotional awareness of the sentiments as connected with various modes of action or dramatic representation”

“The term ‘rasa’ has a twofold significance. It means the ‘aesthetic content of literary art and also ‘aesthetic relish’ which the reader-spectator enjoys”.

“As from a seed a tree grouse, and from the tree flower and fruit, so all the sentiments stands as the root the emotional states have their settled position for the sake of tebhyah the purpose of manifesting the sentiments (rasas).

The sources of origin of these ‘rasas’ are the four basic sentiments ‘erotic’ ‘jurious’, the heroic and the odious.

The comic sentiment becomes possible from the erotic, and the pathetic from the jurious, the origin of the marvelous is from the hroic, and of the terrible from the odious.

A mimicry or imitation of the erotic is fittingly described as the sentiment of laughter And the consequence of the jurious is to be known as pathetic sentiments the heroic is properly described as the marvelous and the odious is terrible.

The erotic sentiment is light green (syama), the comic is described as white (sita), pathetic is grey (kapta) and fearful is red (rakta), the heroic is yellow-red (gaura), terrible is black, the odious is (blue)(rala) and the marvelous is yellow.

The ‘erotic’ (sentiment) has visnu as deity, the ‘comic’ is pramatha, the furious is rudra, the pathetic is yama, odious is mahakala, terrible is kala, the jderoic is mahendra and the marvelous has Brahma as its deity.

Bharatamuni ascribed the natyasastra to many reiualistic Indian critics during the last two hundred years, Bharata is the makers of Rasa theory. One cannot deny his fascinating insight in the psychology of aesthetic reception was a phenomenal triumph of intellect, it is necessary to remind ourselves that the natyasastra is not devoted solely to the exposition of ‘rasa’ theory.