Śānta with the Combination of Other Rasas

Abstract

The concept of Rasa (sentiment) has a very wide scope in the field of Sanskrit literary criticism. Even though Bharatanuni has not referred to Śāntarasa in his elaboration of eight Rasas in his Nāṭyaśāstra, Udbhaṭa mentioned about it (in the ninth century CE) as the ninth one in his Kāvyālaṅkārasārasaṅgraha. Hence, different views on the very existence of Śānta emerged in the ninth century CE. Many rhetoricians and commentators have expressed their views on Śāntarasa from their own perspectives. In fact, the debate of the number of Rasas is still going on among the rhetoricians without agreement. For instance, even though Ānandavardhana, and Abhinavagupta have accepted Śānta as a Rasa, Dhanañjaya, and Dhanika objected for it being difficult to be employed in dramas. Hence, Dhanañjaya and Dhanika agreed with the eight sthāyibhāvas and their respective Rasas. The main objective of this study is thus to examine the place of Śānta in combination with other Rasas. Specifically, this research focuses on the definitions of Śāntarasa enumerated by the dominant rhetoricians between the ninth Century CE and the seventeenth century CE. Accordingly, Ānandavardhana’s Dhvanyaloka, Abhinavagupta’s Locana to the former, Kśemendra’s Auciyavicāracarca, and Vishvanātha’s Sāhityadharpaṇa were used as primary texts in this research. By going through these texts, it is expected to discover the positions of different rhetoricians on Santa.