Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Bharata's Rasa Theory
Bharata's Rasa Theory
Introduction:
Natyashastra:
80
Natyashastra also deals with fourfold acting i.e. Aharya, Angika,
Wachik and Sattvik. These fourfold objective deals with actors, selection
of characters, director, hero, the committee of judge and successive
performance. It contains thirty seven chapters. The chapter arrangement
is as following. The first chapter deals with the origin nature, aims and
function of drama. It also deals with the first performance of God and
Demon. The second chapter guides for the proper structure of theatre,
stage and screen arrangement. The third chapter includes various
methods of worshiping the stage and playhouse. The fourth chapter is
about dance and the types of drama. The fifth chapter deals with the
background of a drama, the details given in this chapter are interesting
and comprehensive.
83
Rasa theory:
The word rasa is well known to all and it is being used in the
context of all forms of arts simply. The relation of rasa with the
interaction between aesthetic and work of art is assumed when we call a
work of art as an interesting/ or a receiver as interesting or boar. The
meaning of the word rasa creates lots of confusion. The understanding of
the rasa is so hypothetical that nobody feels to make more enquiries,
about that, one gets more confused while he or she explains about the
good experience which they got after watching a good tragedy and feels
that whether they belong selfish category that they feel happy in other
grief. If it is not right then why they do like to watch the tragedy again?
Why do they feel to watch again the grief of the characters in the
tragedy? It means that the roots of the experiences of a good play or
drama are different from the emotion or feelings of pleasure. It is better
to understand the word rasa and the theory of rasa from its deeper level
to reach at the roots of these questions.
84
on the qualities of the audiences through the concept of sahardya. Rasa is
an interaction between work of art and audience.
87
shelf the precious diadem stole and put it in his pocket! (Hamlet,
iii.4.100)
(Upadhay, 41)
The above quoted verse gives us the idea how poetry is made
effective with the help of apt diction and imaginative language. A
question is always asked all the time, that why does everyone like to
read literature? The answer is simple that, to gain pleasure, to get rid of
day to day work and to go through different kind of experience. While
reading literature, a reader enjoys the moments, fell something different,
goes through distinguished experience which takes them away from day
to day routine for some time and allows enjoying the new pleasure. This
sort of pleasure, according to Indian literary theory is called as rasa. The
word rasa is translated in various ways. Satya Dev Chaudhary says; “we
88
read a piece of creative literature whether in lyrical or epical form or
composed in any other genre like drama, story, novel or even essay
written in an elegant style, we get pleasure out of that as a reader, and
when we watch a drama or one act play on the stage or on the screen we
enjoy that as a spectator. This sort of pleasure according to Indian
poetics is termed as rasa which in English language is translated as
aesthetic pleasure, aesthetic enjoyment, aesthetic bliss, poetic pleasure,
poetic relish, poetic delight, poetic delectation etc. and technically the
word rasa is termed as sentiment also.” (Satya D Chaudhary, 67)
The question also raises that who is the receiver of the poetic
pleasure? What are the terms that define receiver of different kinds of
literature or art? The answer can be given as following: the receiver and
its definition can be decided by the literary form which they are going
through or enjoying, for Example a perceiver of poem, novel or story is
called as reader. A person watching a play on the stage or movie on
screen is called as spectator. A person listening music on a tape recorder
89
or on a radio is called as listener and the person may call as audience if
he is listening and watching music orchestra on the stage. In short the
perceiver or narrate of the literary work of art can be defined form of
literature which he or she enjoying. So far as Bharata is concerned he
writes a treatise on dramaturgy called Natyashastra and calls the
perceiver as spectator (sahardya) who watches a play being performed
on the stage.
Vibhavanubhav-vyabhicharibhav-samyogadrasanispattih
(Natyashastra, VI)
90
Clarification of Bhava:
The bhava are classified into two parts according to rasa theory,
i.e. sthayibhav and sancharibhav. The sthayibhav develops gradually and
slowly and it remain in the heart for long time but sancharibhav came on
surface within a moment like lightening and it becomes invisible after a
few moments, for ex. Love, disgust and enthusiasm are sthayibhav and
anger, laughter and fear are sancharibhav. This classification of Bhava is
very much applicable in the light of modern psychology.
One must understand the terms which appear in the rasa sutra
given by Bharata. These terms are sthayibhav, sancharibhav
(Vyabhichyaribhav), vibhav and anubhav. The whole core of rasa
theory is depending on these terms.
Sthayibhav:
92
training and also are not born out of any emotion or feeling. (Satya D.
Chaudhary, 68)
Sancharibhav:
These feelings are neither inborn, nor permanent, but born out of
the emotions themselves for ex. The bashfulness is born out of love the
depression out of sorrow etc. more over the transitory feelings are
attached with more than one emotions, for ex. The feelings like
unsteadiness, longing, madness, remorse, dejection, sickness, agony,
despair, depression, nearing death etc. are attached with the emotions
sorrow as well as with love and also with fear. (Satya D. Chaudhary, 69)
Sattivikbhav:
94
Vibhav:
Anubhav:
Vibhav and Anubhav are not directly related to the bhava and
sentiments, but they indicate the factor that leads to sentiment. P. Patnaik
95
observes that: vibhav and Anubhav are not bhava (emotion or state of
mind) but those that lead to and indicate them. A vibhav is that which
leads to or causes the bhava. And Anubhav is one which worldly
manifests necessarily follows or is the effect of the bhava that can be
noticed by the senses. (Patnaik, 32) According Bharata, when these three
vibhav (excitant), Anubhav (ensuing responses) and Sancharibhav
(transitory feeling) come together and correlate with any Sthayibhav
(permanent emotion) of a sahardya (a perceiver), the rasa, the poetic
pleasure is manifested as the milk is converted in curd after the mixing
of anything sour.
98
The term abhidha-vyapara indicates the conventional, traditional
meaning and association of a word. Through abhidha-vyapara, the first
function of the word, the conventional image associated with the text is
aroused in the mind of the reader or spectator, that is, he grasps the sense
of the text through the traditional meaning of each and every word
arranged in a sentence or sentences. Bhavaktva-vyapara is the second
function of the word through which the three vibhav, anubhav and
sancharibhav, which are connected to particular situation become
sadharnikrata (generalized), i.e. all the individuality, become
universalized, with the result, the reader or preconception against the
above said three vibhav. The third function of the word is bhojkatva-
vyapar or bhog-vyapara. The word bhog indicates the state of
enjoyment. It means the Sahardya enjoys the rasa through a work of art
after all three vibhav get free from the individuality and becomes
generalized and sahardya also gets rid of all sorts of prejudices against
all vibhav and this Sadharanikaran vyapara leads spectator towards
realization of the rasa that (Kavya-Anand). It is short and simple
elucidation of the theory by Bhattanayaka. His followers and
contemporary rhetoricians also accept his theory and try to contribute in
its development, among these Abhinavgupta exposition must be taken
into account. He explains that the character presented by the poet in a
poem or a play lose their individual identity and assume the qualities of
common men and women crossing the limits of space and time, they
become universalized and are understood in their general character
seeing them in their universal or general form, the reader becomes free
99
from all sort of prejudices. (Satya D Chaudhary, 88-90) The theory
Sadharanikaran may be summarized as in following few statements.
What is the number of the rasa? There are lots of opinions about
the number of rasa and it is a subject of long dispute since ancient time.
Whether Natyashastra includes eight rasa or nine rasa is controversial
matter. But many of the scholars agree that the ninth rasa is added by
Abhinavgupta in his commentary on Natyashastra entitled as
Abhinavabharati. He highlights the Shantrasa as ninth rasa and argues
that all other rasa lead to it. Therefore much of the scholars discuss the
eight rasa in together and they discuss Shanta rasa and its relationship
with the other eight rasa independently. In a drama there are the
following eight rasa: erotic (Sringara), comic (Hasya), compassionate
100
(Karuna), furious (Rudra) heroic (Vira), terrifying (Bhayanak),
disgusting (Bibhtsa) and awesome (Adbhuta). (Masson and Patwardhan
44)
101
Sringara Rasa:
Sringara rasa i.e. erotic one arises from the sthayibhav of love,
(Natyashastra VI-45) whatever in the ordinary world is bright, pure
(Madhya), shining or beautiful is associated with love. It has (Alambana)
–vibhav: young men and women who are noble character. It arises from
(Uddipana) vibhav such as a representation of the seasons, garlands,
ointments, ornaments, people dears to one object of the senses, fine
homes, love making, going to gardens, listening music, watching game
and so forth. It should be acted out by such anubhav as skillful use of
eyes. Frowning, side glances, felicitous movements (lalita), gentle bodily
movements (angahara), and soft speech. The accompanying transitory
emotions that do not belong to love are laziness, violence, and disgust.
As far love in separation, it should be acted out by anubhav such as
world weariness, physical weakness, anxiety, envy, fatigue, worry,
longing, dreaming, awakening, sickness, insanity, apoplexy, lifelessness
and death. (Masson and Patwardhan, 49)
2. The view of Bhoj that Sringara is the synonym of all rasa, and that
other rasa are only the variety of Sringara is the pre-eminent rasa
of all the may not be taken as wholly acceptable.
104
Karun Rasa:
Karun rasa has its central emotions as sorrow and pathos and are
found very importantly both in Mahabharata and Ramayana. Bharata
states in Natyashastra (VI-40) that Karun rasa means compassionate or
the pathetic and sorrowful that comes from the primary rasa of Rudra or
the furious. The result (Karma) of furious should be known as the
aesthetic experience of compassion. It clears that Rudra is primary
source of the Karun and that leads to pathos or sorrow. In the chapter VI
of Natyashastra it is stated that the Karun rasa arises from the permanent
emotion of sorrows. It proceeds from vibhav such as curse, separation
from those who are dear, their downfall, and loss of wealth, death and
imprisonment or from content with misfortune (vyasan), destructions
(upghat) and calamity (Vidroh). (Masson and Patwardhan, 48-52) The
soka or sorrow is the sthayibhav of Karun rasa or the mood that of
unhappiness is generated throughout its sthayibhav i.e. soka or sorrow.
Aestheticians have called it sukhadukhatmaka. Sringara, Hasya, Vira,
Adbhuta and Shanta provide pleasure while Karun, Rudra and Bhayanak
causes’ painful emotion or grief. Ramchandra Gunchandra, the author of
Natydarpan believes that the second group of rasa does not provide
pleasure but they cause agony. In fact the argument can be refuted easily
as aesthetic experience is different from actual worldly experience. We
do not like to face painful situations in actual life but we do so in poetry
and they do provide a kind of vicarious pleasure. In literature we go
through them. Here Aristotle theory seems to be truly applicable where
our painful emotions are purified and arouse the pleasure. Madhusudan
Sarswati is the first critic to explain this, according to him pleasure is
105
experienced from all rasa but their degree differs. Sattvagun is the
principle source of pleasure. Rajoguna and Tamoguan do not allow rasa
to create true aesthetic pleasure though they are always present. If
Sattvagun is predominant and rajasguna and tamoguna are subordinated
the aesthetic pleasure derived from rasa are bound to be abundant. While
Vishvanath remarks that if Karuna Rasa had been only painful, no one
would read or watch tragic plays. Aesthetic pleasure is derived when the
sahardya rises above the self. He does not remain an individual but
identifies himself with suffering itself. Spiritually speaking it can be said
that the sahardya experiences aesthetic pleasure out of annihilation of
ego and identification with the universal feeling of sorrow. The Indian
poetics believes that through universalization, all rasa provide pleasure
at the time of their maturity. Spectator on account of universalization
descends from the particular to the general or universal emotional
ground. This means that the painful emotion that he experiences is not
confined to any place or time. The spectator thus becomes free from
individual feelings and ego. This sense of egolessness makes him
experience pleasure from the Karun rasa. (Ami Upadhay, 53-54) Karun
rasa can be manifested through great skill of representation and literary
power. Natyashastra opines that the Karun rasa stems from sorrow or
grief. The sthayibhav or permanent state of the Karun rasa is soka or
grief. The various vibhav may be stated of Karun rasa as curse, death,
loss of some nearer or loved one, disaster, loss of wealth etc. the
sancharibhav or transient feeling states of Karun rasa are despondency.
Despair, pangs of death, worry, illness, fatigues etc. the anubhav or
106
effects of sorrow are intensified by these transient states. Rama’s tragic
grief after exiling Sita to forest is an excellent example of Karun rasa.
In the light of the above discussion the Karun rasa can be summarized as
following.
4. It is true that in life the grief, love etc. cause worldly pain and the
pleasure but in poetry and drama both these types of emotions
when combined with vibhav etc. give the sahardya transcendental
pleasure. Consequently the rasa Karun, Bhayanak etc. are not
painful, they too are as pleasing as the rasa Sringara Hasya etc
107
Rudra and Vir Rasa:
At the same time, the Krodh is born out rajasguna while Utsaha is
born is born out sattvaguna. In anger a person loses the balance of his
mind while in energy and enthusiasm, he not only retains it but the mind
is quite active and energetic. In anger, the person is motivated by
relation while in bravery it is not so anger results in injustice and
destruction while bravery never results in destruction but in frightening
against the destructive forces. (Ami Upadhay, 58) The above both the
rasa may be summarized as following:
1. The Rudra rasa and Vira rasa looks quite similar to each other but
they are two different rasa.
110
2. Since the sthayibhav and sancharibhav are different of both the
rasa, they cannot be included into each other.
112
As in above lines Bharata explains that the sthayibhav or
permanent emotion of Adbhuta rasa is Vismaya i.e. astonishment.
Something that is marvelous and astonishing may be called as Alambana
vibhav (supportive cause) of Adbhuta rasa. The color of portrayal, shape,
size, dimension, distance and nature are some exciting cause (Uddipana-
vibhav) of Adbhuta rasa. The Sattivikbhav of Adbhuta rasa (psycho-
manifestation) are perspiration, trembling and choking voice. The
transitory emotions are uneasiness, excitation, reasoning and frightening
etc. The feeling of wonder and marvelousness (astonishment) is
involved in the state of excitement. The consequents or reaction
(anubhav) of Adbhuta rasa dilation of eyes, horripilation, tears,
trembling of voice etc. sometime the state of astonishment is involved in
a sense of pleasure or fear or sorrow at the sight of some unpleasant
objects or events. Dharmattma, one of Indian philosophers called
Adbhuta rasa as great rasa and it is involved in all kinds of literature.
Vishvanath calls it as synonyms of wonder which leads to the expansion
of the heart of spectator.
To sum up, Adbhuta rasa is like all other rasa, the element of
wonder is present in all kinds of rasa. It is the basic principle which
causes the expansion of the heart of the spectator.
Bhayanak and Bibhatsa rasa deal with the terrifying and the
disgusting emotions. They appear in literature almost few times or they
are the most neglected rasa by the artists. The Bhayanak and Bibhatsa
rasa generally been put together because these two rasa are so intimately,
113
connected, looking at them in isolation (separate) would make their
discussion a little incomplete. Bharata writes in Natyashastra (VI-41),
the sight of the disgusting (given rise to) the terrifying. (Masson and
Patwardhan, 48) as it explains above that a lot of vibhav and anubhav of
both the rasa are similar and involved in each other. Bibhatsa rasa is
considered as primary and Bhayanak rasa is supposed to follow from it.
(P. Patnaik, 176) Bharata in his Natyashastra (VI-68) explains the
Bhayanak rasa following, the rasa called Bhayanak has fear as its
permanent emotion. It arises from such vibhav as ghastly noises, seeing
of supernatural beings, ghost, fear and panic due to the (crisis) of owls
(or the howling) jackals, going to an empty house or to a forest, hearing
about, speaking about or seeing the imprisonment or murder of one’s
relatives. (Masson and Patwardhan, 54) As Bharata noted above the
sthayibhav of Bhayanak rasa is fear (bhaya). The proper treatment with
the emotion of fear and its representation the Bhayanak rasa can be
developed. Fear can be transmitted to the audience by two different
ways. First, if one is sufficiently distanced, what one will pervasive, will
be the manifestation of fear in the work? In this case, he will recognize
and perceives fear and its accessory emotions and states within the work.
But if he is not able to keep sufficient distance himself or if he is able to
share the fear of the victim, he will feel an emphatic response to fear
himself. This is generally the case in horror fiction. (Patnaik, 177) The
vibhav of Bhayanak rasa can be mentioned as, ghastly noises, seeing
supernatural elements, darkness, alone in room, an old uninhibited home,
a dark big forest a wild hunting animal etc. the transitory emotion
(sancharibhav) that constitutes the Bhayanak rasa are disappointing,
114
depression, agitation, destruction, fatigue and inconsistent state of mind
etc. the Bhayanak sentiments become greater and sharper as the
greatness of the conflict which leads to the fearful deeds. The elements
or moods which come under this category are for ex. The incidents of
ghost on the stage help in the production of Bhayanak rasa.
115
lists the vibhav of bibhatsa rasa as discussing, hearing or seeing the
object which is ugly, unpleasant and unclear and also undesired. Further
he explains the anubhav (responses) of the bibhatsa rasa in Natyashastra
(VI-72) as the following; contraction of the whole body (sarvanga,
samahra) facial contradictions (mukhavikuna), vomiting (ullekhana),
spitting, violent, trembling of the body (udvejana) and similar gesture.
(Masson and Patwardhan, 55) There is relation of stimulus and the
response with the incidents or scenes performed on the stage which is
repulsive, disgusting and ugly, they called as stimulus for the response of
repulsiveness.
Shanta rasa:
Bharata has put forth the rasa thought, in a relation to the play. He
calls the rasa as natyarasa. Many of the philosophers have tried to
interpret his incomplete and distracted statements. They criticized the
Natyashastra and tried to come at certain conclusion. Abhinavgupta, the
11th century Kashmiri Pandit wrote the text called Abhinavabharati
which is also known as the commentary on Bharata’s Natyashastra. It is
an only comprehensive commentary of the ancient period on
Natyashastra, which helps a lot to the new learner of the Natyashastra.
The theoretical debate on rasa sidhant continued for eight to ten years
119
after Bharata which came to a certain, common agreement or conclusion,
which is called rasa theory at present.
122
real role but not involves in that or not experiences the role in real. The
hero or heroine in a play don’t become the lover and beloved in real life,
they resemblances like that for few hours of the play. Hence, the vibhav
is like a cause but not as exact cause. The performance, acting of hero-
heroine and other characters in a play is called anubhav. The acting of
the hero is also called as anubhav. In English, the term anubhav is called
as ensuing responses. They understand and accept here the emotional
states of real role, and act on the stage accordingly, through which the
spectators understands the emotional states in the paly. Bharata has used
the term samyogod in his rasa sutra, which indicates the vital need of
combination of these bhava in a play when we think all of them as
separately, we find that they are passive (murt), but when we correlate
them to each other, combined them properly, they get manifested
through the particular rasa. The sthayibhav and sancharibhav cannot be
realized without vibhav and anubhav in a play, and there is no
expression to vibhav and anubhav without sthayibhav and sancharibhav.
They are disabled without each other (passive). The sthayibhav
ultimately transforms into rasa, but they transform through sancharibhav,
hence Bharata has mentioned the sancharibhav in his rasasutra instead of
the sthayibhav.
1. Rati (Love)
2. Hasya (Humor)
3. Karuna (Compassion)
4. Rudra (Horror)
5. Vira (Heroic)
125
6. Bhayanak (Fear)
7. Bibhatsa (disgust)
It may be noted that as these various bhava are listed, some time
we find confusion or a conflict in distinguishing one reaction from the
other. But as this seems to have suffered worse manhandling one need
not feel uncertain about the basic general idea. Secondly, though in some
cases the sancharibhav seem to be identical, it must be noted that as
individual reactions, these vary from person to person. But anubhav
being natural or immediate reactions would be common to larger
126
numbers. Sancharibhav are also called Vyabhichyaribhav because they
change from person to person. (Adya, Rangacharya. 79-81)
127
from the sentiments expressed by the real character or from the
sentiments of the characters’ which are purely imaginative and also from
those of the actors and actress who intimate the original characters in
their form, dress, language and actions. The realization of rasa becomes
more difficult in case a spectator has preconception of any sort against
them. Bhattanayaka presented the theory Sadharanikaran in an attempt to
answer these questions. He not only elucidates the theory but tells the
reader what is the universalized and how does it help in the realization of
rasa. He maintained that to enjoy any piece of composition, one has to
go through the three Shabda vyapara (function of words). Through
abhida-vyapara, the first function of word where the conventional image
is associated with the text and it aroused in the mind of the spectator that
means he grasps the sense of the text through the traditional meaning of
each and every word arranged in a sentence or sentences. Then through
the Bhavaktva-vyapara, the second function of the word where all the
three – vibhav (the excitant), anubhav (the ensuing) and sancharibhav
(the transitory sentiments) which were connected with particular
situation now become generalized i.e. all the three vibhav, anubhav and
sancharibhav being free from the individuality, become universalized
with the result the reader or spectator gets rid of all sorts of prejudices or
preconceptions against the above said trio. Through the bhojkatva
vyapara or bhog-vyapara (the third function of the word) spectator
enjoys the rasa. Thus the principle of Sadharanikaran feels that the
particular persons and even the objects presented in a work of art are
freed from all the relations of the space and time in which they had
accrued. The basic sentiment of the reader or spectator thus matures into
128
rasa, when it correlates with the excitant, the ensuing and transitory
sentiment of their, which has been produced in their mind by themselves.
However the excitant, etc. are of course the prototypes of those
expressed in a poem or drama. In short, through universalization
elements of space and time and individuality have been inhibited, the
whole episode becomes universal and it appeals to all. (Satya D
Chaudhary, 87-96)
130
Bhattauta writes a treatise called Kavya Kautuka, where, he says
that a dramatic presentation is not a mere physical occurrence. In
witnessing a play we forget the actual perpetual experience of the
individuals on the stage. The past impressions, memories, associations
etc. become connected with the present experience. As a result, a new
experience is created and this provides new types of pleasure and pains.
This is technically known as rasvadana, camatkara, carvana.
To sum up, a valid literary theory is always one that has practical
application. A literary theory is about literature unless it can be applied,
it has very little practical relevance. In most cases, a good literary theory
has a double potential. It can lead to further theories, to newer
philosophical speculation. At the same time it can also be applied to
literary texts. The literary theory must cover a wide enough area. In
131
other words, it must have a general applicability. Not merely that, it also
be made of something that is not a matter of vogue. When interests have
shifted, such a theory would be left nowhere. And finally, it must be
flexible enough to take the wear of time, to be malleable to interpretation
and newer deeds.
134
References:
135