KATHARSIS AND RASA This paper attempts a comparative study of Aristotle’s doctrine of “Katharsis” and Bharata’s doctrine of “Rasa’” as expounded by Abhinavagupta. The chief source for the doctrine of “Katharsis” is Poetics. But references to this doctrine are also found in Aristotle’s other works, chiefly, in Politics and Rhetorric, In fact, from Politics, we learn that Aristotle intended a fuller treatment of this doctrine in Poetics.' But in Poetics, as we have it today, the doctrine of “Katharsis” is not treated fully. Besides, Poetics, remains an incomplete work; as, in it, only tragedy is treated fully. The chief source for the doctrine of “Rasa” is Bharata’s Natyasastra. _ (Dramaturgy). This work, unlike Poetics, is a complete and comprehensive treatise. on _ Indian Dramaturgy. It deals with the nature, function, constituents and types of drama; the nature of aesthetic experience; the Aristotle, Pol. V. (viii) 7. 1341 b. 39. 2 According to tradition, all was not well with man and the world, A deputation led by Indra waited on Bhrama, They implored him to devise a means to improve the world, especially because the Sudras were increasing and the Vedas were closed books to them, The result was that Bhrama created a fifth Veda—Drama—by taking one element from each of the other four Vedas. Thus, he took the text from Rgveda music from Samaveda, action from Yajurveda and rasa from Atharvaveda. Then he commissioned Indra to produce it, but he pleaded inability. And so the job was given to Bharata and this proved a happy choice because 44 Bro, Sebastian Vilangiyil, Ph.D. nature and number of emotions aroused and the means of their arousal; the qualifications of the aesthetes, actors and stage managers; the methods of dramatic presentation and all other aspects of drama. Poetics and Natyasastra attempts to inter- pret and evaluate the dramatic traditions and practices of ancient Greece and India respectively. They also serve as guides to practitioners of the art. Aristotle (384 - $22 B.C.) lived in the fourth century B.C, We do not know the exact period of Bharata’s life. It is supposed. that he lived in the fifth or sixth century A.D. But it does not follow from this that the doctrine of “Katharsis” is the more ancient of the two! In fact, it may be that the doctrine of “Rasa” is the more ancient, for according to Indian tradition, both drama and Natyasastra data back to Vedio times and their creation is directly attributed to Bhrama, the Creator.? For the Indian, drama is the fifth Veda, All that Bharata Bharata had a hundred sons and he could train them. Bharata felt the need for women actors and Bhrama obliged him by supplying him “Apasaras” —damsels. The first play that Bharata produced was “The Defeat of the Demons.” The Demons took strong objection to it and Bhrama pacified them saying that the drama catered to the different tastes of different people, adding that, it preaches yet delights, recreates yet is reasonable; teaches yet is broadminded, And the demons were satisfied.” * See Adya Rangacharya, Drama in Sanskrit Literature (Bombay: Popular Prakashan, 1967), Pp. 18-20. ,did was to compile into a treatise what was handed down for generations. There is an interesting parallel between Greek and Indian thinking on the dramatic and poetic arts. Plato, the Greek; and Manu, the Indian Law-Giver; inveighed against these arts as contributing to immorality. And just as Aristotle’s Poetics defended these arts from the strictures of Plato, so the Smriti of Yajanavalkya defended them against those of Manu. Aristotle and Bharata stress the pleasurable aspects of the drama. But, they do not, on that account, neglect the moral refinement that dramatic presentations effect in the aesthete. But such moral refinements are subordinated to aesthetic pleasure which it is the chief function of drama to provide. Moral refinement is not a substitute for aesthetic pleasure; if anything, it is an outcome of it. Both consider aesthetic experience different. from ordianary experience, because the one is mediate and the other is immediate, This explains why, what are, ordinarily, painful experiences become pleasurable when presented through the medium of art. To Aristotle, the distinctive function of tragedy is to arouse “pity and fear so as to achieve their katharsis. To Bharata, the function of drama is the enjoyment of Rasa. These two doctrines have been endlessly discussed and debated. Even now they give rise to lively debates, ‘They are thus living and vital doctrines. In this paper, both these doctines will be interpreted from their dramatic function, in an effort to sec if they present a common understanding of the nature of drama. For the purposes of this paper, the discussion on the doctrine of “Katharsis” will be based on S.H. Bucher’s “Aristotle's Thoery of Peotry and Fine Art."* And the discussion on the doctrine of “Rasa” will be based on Abhinavagupta’s commentaries on Bhararata’s Natyasastra found in different sources.* The Doctrine of Katharsis In Aristotle’s famous definition of tragedy, we find the following: aa with incidents arousing pity and fear, wherewith to accomplish its catharsis of such emotions. To Aristotle, tragedy is essentially an imita- tion of action and life, of happiness and misery. To him, it is action that makes us happy or unhappy, since the end for which we live is a certain kind of activity.4 The Aristotelian theory of “Katharsis” cannot be divorced from his understanding of action as not mere physical or external activity but as “everything that expresses a mental state, that reveals a rational personality” and that “such actions need not be processes extending over @ period of time: they may realize themselues in a single moment; they may be summed up in a particular mood, a given situation.” 3 SH. Bucher, Aristotle's TI Poetry and Fine Art (New York: Dover Publications, Inc., 1951) * See seleeted Bibliography. “ Aristotle, Poetics, 6. ed. Justin D. Kaplan (New York: Pocket Books, 1958), pp. 348-349, 45Action, in the above sense, reveal the inner qualities of the dramatic focus or hero and serve to arouse spectator interest in him and his fortunes. And such interest facilitates identification with him. As a consequence, his fortunes stir and excite the dormant emotions of the spectator. The stimuli coming from the dramatic focus determines the nature of the emotion roused. According to Aristotle, tragedy, for example, rouses the dormant emotions of pity and fear. And the rousing of these emotions is the means for achieving their “Katharsis.” Pity is defined by Aristotle “as a sort of pain at an evident evil of destructive kind in the case of somebody who does not deserve it, the evil being one which we might expect to happen to ourselves or to our friends, and this at the time when it is seen to be near at hand.” He defines fear as ‘‘a species of pain or disturbance arising from an impression of impending evil which is destructive or painful in nature.” He goes on to say that pity tums into fear where the object is so nearly related to us that the suffering seems to be our own. Pity and fear are thus correlated emotions. We pity others where, under like circumstances, we should fear for ourselves. He adds that those who are incapable of fear are incapable of pity. True tragic fear is not a languid emotion. The tension of the mind, the agony with which we await the impending catastrophe, springs from our sympathy with the hero in whose existence our life has merged. The spectacle of his errors and misfortunes gives us an insight into the fate that awaits us. Tragic fear is thus an interpersonal emotion. The greatness of the issues excites us and their inevitableness awes us. 46 The tragic effect is the result of the merger of pity and fear. Tragedy secks to blend fear with pity in due proportion. Seif-absorbed anxiety and alarm defeat sympathy. Pity must be preserved from sentimentalism and fear from selfishness. The spectator quits the sphere of the individual. He indentifies himself with the fate of the hero and, through him, with that of humanity at large. He is faced with a suffering greater than his own which produces a sympathetic shudder with the result that he is lifted out of himself. And this is ecstatic, It is precisely in this transport of fecling that the distinctive tragic pleasure lies, Pity and fear are, by this means, purged of the impure elements that cling to them in life. The result is a noble emotional satisfaction. “Katharsis” then is that process by which, through emotional identification with the tragic sufferer, the spectator rises above himself and becomes an integral part of universal law and divine plan, The resulting emotional excitations resolve themselves into a pleasurable calm and become part of the new order of things. The Doctrine of Rasa A proper appreciation of the doctrine of “Rasa” demands a thorough understand- ing of the following: because aesthetic experience, according to the doctrine, is triadic in nature ‘The Nature of the Aesthetic Object ‘The Qualifications of the Aesthete and ‘The Nature of the Aesthetic Experience. 5 S.H, Bucher, Ibid, pp. 123-237 (underscoring supplied)1. The Nature of the Aesthetic Object According to Natyasastra, the aesthetic object is the configuration of the following elements: a, Vibhavas or Excitants 6. Anubhavas or Ensuents ¢, Vyabicaribhavas or Transient Emotions, and d. Sthayibhavas or Permanent Emotions. a. Vibhavas or Excitants These are of two kinds: Alambanas or Essential Excitants and Uddipanas or Enhancing Excitants. Alambanas or Essential Exictants These consist of the hero, heroine and the rival hero. For example, in Kalidasa’s play “Sakuntala” the sight of Sakuntala the horoine, rouses the passion of love in Dushyanta, the hero. So Sakuntala is an Alambana or Essential Exictant. Without her, the passion of love would not have arisen in Dushyanta. Uddipanas or Enchancing Excitants These are the circumstances that serve to enhance the essential excitants, For example, in the same play, the sight of Sakuntala enjoying the air in a garden, near a river, serves to fan the flame of love excited in Dushyanta at the sight of her. ‘The garden, the river, the gentle breeze are Uddipanas or Enhancing Excitants. b. Anubhavas or Ensuents These are the physical expressions that manifest the state of feeling of the hero or heroine. ‘These physical changes communicate the nature of the emotion aroused and help arouse an identical emotion in the aesthete. They are also of two kinds: Aunbhavas and Sattvikabhavas. Aunubhavas or Voluntary Changes Changes, such as glances, movements of the body, smile, etc. induced by an effort of the will, are not infallible signs of the presence of such an emotion, They can be induced when no emotion is felt. Such volutary changes are “Aunbhavas.” Sattivikabhavas or Involuntary Changes Involuntary physical expressions, such as, change of color, blushes and horripilation, are sure signs of the presence of the emotion. They are automatic and betray the emotions that bring them about. These involuntary changes are known as “Sattvikabhavas.” c. Vyabicaribhavas or Transient Emotions A man who has fallen in love experiences a host of other emotions besides the passion of love. He has moments of exaltation and moments of dejection. He feels intensely jealous and possessive. He experiences pain, pleasure, fear, disgust, hate, despair; all depending on how his love progresses. These emotions come and go. These help the aesthete to measure the progress of the basic emotion, Such passing fellings and emotions that help edentify the progress of the basic emotion are known as Vyabicaribhavas. 47d. Sthyibhavas of Permanent Emotions These are the dormant emotions that are activated during the dramatic presentation by the Vibhavas or excitants. Most aestheticians limit them to nine: love, mirth, wonder, enthusiasm, anger, sorrow, fear, disgust. and tranquility. Some consider the first four as pleasurable emotions, and the next four as painful emotions. The last one may be considered a neutral emotion. These emotions tum into “Rasas’ by the action of the Excitants. 2. Qualifications of the Aesthete He must have the capacity to discern the aesthetic elements of a presentation and derive great emotional satisfaction from their contemplation, This presupposes that he is intellectually and emotionally equipped for such an experience; that is, he must have had similar experiences in real life. For one who has never had such an experience, is unlikely to be stirred by a stage presentation. Only one possessed of such aesthetic sensibility will be maximally stirred by a stage presentation and so be in a position to derive maximum satisfaction from its contemplation, Besides, aesthetic exposure to such experiences facilitates the excitement of the emotions in him and thereby increases his capacity for their enjoyment. It is important to keep in mind that the aesthetic object is not “the sensibly present but the imaginatively grasped”, and only one who has been exposed to such experiences can with ease transfer his thoughts from the sensibly present to their underlying _ spiritual significance. Without this transference, no aesthetic experience is possible. 48 3. The Nature of the Aesthetic Experience When a man possessed of such sensibility and power of visualization is brought face to face with the aesthetic object, it timulates his imagination and his interest is transferred from the sensibly present to the implied and suggested, This transports him to a new world, a world of his own creation, and in this world he is confronted by the focus of the situation or the hero. Because of the aesthete’s imaginative sympathy with the hero, a slow process of identification sets in and slowly his personlaity begins to be merged with that of the hero. The result is that he begins to view things from the hero’s point of view, undergoes the same struggles, achieves the same victories and derives the same satisfactions. At this stage, he is ready for aesthetic experience. Aesthetic experience is akin to mystic experience. The aesthete, like the mystic, does not rest in the sensibly present, but goes beyond it to the contemplation and enjoyment of what it signifies. As the presentation proceeds and reaches its climax, the emotions that were roused also reach their peak of intensity. This aesthetic experience has two levels. At the first level, the dormant emotions are roused by imaginative identification with the focus of the situation. This is pleasurable. Here, the subject-object polarity still remains. The second level is reached when the aroused emotion sinks back into the subconscious once again and rests within itself. This is even more pleasurable. At this second stage, the self relishes itself and stands revealed in all its glory. “Rasa” at its highest level, is this experience of the selfrelishing itself, Here all objectivity and separateness disappéars. The self is in total possession of itself, And the result is ecstasy. + The reader will have noticed that the inter- pretations of the two dictrines present certain striking similarities. The two theorists agree that the essential function of dramatic presentation is the rousing and allaying of dormant emotions of the spectator and that such arousal and allaying of emotions are highly pleasurable, even when the emotions aroused are of a painful nature. In the Aristotelian theory, the function of tragedy is not merely to provide outlet for pity and fear but to provide for them a distinctively aesthetic satisfaction: to purify and clarify them through the medium of art, In the same way, according to the “Rasa” theory, things that would in normal circumstances produce pity, disgust or horror awaken these feelings in poetry and drama but convey them in such an ideal and generic form that these feelings are converted into an impersonal joy which is ineffable and indivisible. According to both theories, this emotional excitement is facilitated if the spectator is a man of taste endowed with vision and imaginative power, an aesthete, in other words. And a man of such aesthetic sensibility can derive emotional satisfaction by the mere reading of a poem or play. His imagination supplies all that is needed for the proper understanding, appreciation and enjoyment of the poem or play. The two theorists also agree that well known stories make the best plots. The audience is familiar with the incidents of such plots and therefore the poet need not elaborate on details. Plots of this kind put the audience in the mood for aesthetic enjoyment almost from the start of the play. Looking at the way in which Greek Tragedy and Indian Drama achieve their objectives, we find further grounds for similarities. Both achieve their objective by meanas of generalization and indentification. Generalization is the process by which the focus of the situation is rid of the limiting circumstances of time, place and person — the process by which the actor impersonating the historical personage is seen as the historical personage and not as actor so and so playing the role of such and such a personage. At this stage, the process of identification takes over. The aesthete, who sees the actor as the historical personage, identifies himself with him; that is, speaks, acts and feels as he does. The result is that his dormant emotions are stirred and a spiritual change comes over his personality. Art originates in the mental perception of an ideal. Endowed with intelligence and the power of reflection as he is, man notices that nature, though she strives, never attains the perfection she is capable of. It is the function of art to remedy this situation. [Art strives to create a world that is free from the limitations of the actual world, Art thus strives to make the ideal real. To seize the universal and to reproduce it in simple and sensuous form is not to reflect a reality already familiar through sense perceptions; rather it is rivalry of nature, a completion of her unfulfilled ‘Purposes, a correction of her failures. 49Art is concemed with presenting things as they ought to be. Art discovers the ideal to which nature tends but rarely or never attains. Beneath the individual it finds the universal. It passes beyond the bare reality given by nature and expresses a purified reality disengaged from accident and freed from conditions that thwart its development. The ideal thus becomes the real rid of its contradictions, unfolds itself according to the laws of its own being, apart from alien influences and the disturbances of chance. Works of art are idealized representations of human life; its mental and spiritual movements and all that constitutes the soul. Art seeks to reproduce an inward Process. It is a psychic energy working outwards, Events and situations are included in so far as they spring from an inward act of the will or elicit some activity of thought or feeling. Objects of artistic imitations are characteristic moral qualities, permanent dispositions of the mind transient emotions. Poetry expresses most adequately the universal element in human nature and life. It liberates man from the tyranny of his physical surroundings. It is not concerned with fact but with what transcends fact: it represents things which are not and never can be in actual experience; it gives man the ought to be, the form that answers to the true idea.® 50 Poetic imitation of life attains perfect form in drama because speech is rendered by speech and action by action. Drama employs appropriate language and presents the aesthetic configuration more completely than any other kind of poetry by pressing into its service different modes of action, change of voice, facial expressions, attitudes, make-ups, dress and scenery. ‘The dramatist aims at presenting an emotive expreience. This experience is that of an ideal man in an ideal situation. It is the inner state of his self. Situation, mimetic changes, etc. serve to concretize his emotive experience. This experience is subjective and therefore the spectator can become aware of it only through indentification with the focus of the situation. But before the process of identification can set in, the focus of the situation must be universalized; that is, he must be freed from the limitations of time, place and person. In this way he is perceived as the historical person and not as so and so impersonating him. Drama thus achieves its objective of lifting the aesthete out of himself by the twin processes of universalisation and identifica tion, And these are the two processes at work in “Katharsis” and “Rasa”, And it is in this transcending of his self that the aesthete attains his full selfhood, It is the most ecstatic of all experiences. © Ibid., pp. 151-168.BIBLIOGRAPHY Aristotle. Poetics, trans. Ingram Bywater, (ed) Justin D. Kaplan. New York: Pocket Books, 1958. Bucher, S.H. Aristotle’s Theory of Peotry and Find Art. New York: Dover Publications Inc., 1951. Rangacharya, Adya. Drama in Sanskrit Literature. Bombay: © Popular Prakashan, 1967. SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY De, Sushil Kumar, History. of Sanskrit Poetics, Vol. II. Calcutta: Firma M.L. Mukhopadyay, 1960. Cooper, Lane. The Poetics of Aristotle, Its Meaning and Influence, New York: Cornell University Press, 1956. House, Humphrey. Aristotle’s Poetics. London: Rupert Davis, 1956. Mukherji, Ramaranjan. Literaray Criticism in Ancient India. Calcutta: 1966. Pandey, Kanti Chandra. Comparative Aesthetics, Lucknow: 1957. Wells, Henry W. The Classical Drama of India, Bombay: Asia Publishing House, 1963. 51