http://www.new.dli.ernet.

in/handle/2015/282896

Rasa , the aesthetic object, it is not pure unity, but unity in multiplicity. The unifying factor in mulitiplicity is a basic
state of mind (sthayibhava) which binds together in an organic whole,

1. The emotive situation in human setting, consisting of physical cause of the basic mental state (vibhava-
determinants)
2. The mimetic changes, which are inspired by the aroused basic mental state and as such are indicative of
the internal state and as such are indicative of the internal state (anubhava-consequents)
3. The transient emotions –byabhicaribhava)
The basic mental state is the central and the most important phase of this configuration. The rest are
simply necessary accompaniments, very much like the paraphernalia of a king. They raise the basic mental
state to prominence just as paraphernalia does the king. And just as in the midst of the entire
paraphernalia it is the king, who is the centre of attraction of the spectator, so is the basic mental state to
the audience. Therefore, when it is stated that the basic mental state is the aesthetic object (sthayibhavo
rasamrthah) the implication is not that other constituents of the aesthetic configuration do not figure in
the conscisousness, but simply that they appear as subordinate…

Vibhava stands for the emotive situation ---navya got the job…responsible for emotion….
The experience , therefore , is due to medium, through which the child works himself up so as to
experience horse ride, just the same is the case with the situation, presented on the stage. It is only a
medium through which the actor works himself up to a certain emotional pitch and consequently shows
the signs, which are natural to emotion.
Thus the word vibhava stands for the dramatic situation, which is not the cause but only a medium,
through which emotion arises in the actor. But emotion in the spectator is due to identification with the
hero. Vibhava is so called, because it arouses emotion in a manner quite different from that, in which
emotion arises in actual life.
Emotion always has an objective reference.
Accordingly vibhava is represented to have two aspects
1. Alambana, the object, which is primarily responsible for the arousal of emotion, on which emotion
depends for its very being and which is its mainstay: and
2. Udddipana, the environment, the entire surrounding, which enhances the emotive effect of the focal
point, the object which primarily stimulates emotion.

Here, shakuntala , who has been brought to focus by the aforesaid talk and becomes the object of
love of dushyantha, is the alambana vibhava and the entire forest scene with beautiful hermitage
garden at its centre and pleasant breeze, gentle sunshine and the sweet companions, which off-set
her beauty and make it more bewitching, are uddipana vibhava.

Anubhava…
All the physical changes, which are consequent on the rise of an emotion and are in actual like looked
upon as the effects of emotion, are called anubhavas, to distinguish them from the physical effects of
 emotion which arise in real life. They are called anubhavas, because they communicate the basic
emotion to the characters, present on the stage, or make known the nature of emotion in the hero,
as also because they make the spectator experience an identical emotion (anubhavyati)

The physical changes and movements, which follow the rise of an emotion, are of two kinds
1. Voluntary and involuntary

There are some movements and changes which are definitely willed by the person in emotion, which are willful
expressions of emotion, such as the movement of eyes and eyebrows, which spring from the intention of the
person, swayed by emotion, to communicate it to others.

But there are other changes and movements, which automatically follow the rise of emotion, such as change of
color, horripilation and blush. The voluntary physical changes are called simply anubhavas; but the involuntary
ones are called satvikabhavas. The former can be produced by an effort of will even though the emotion, with
which they are supposed to be causally connected, may not be present in the heart. They therefore, are not the
infallible signs of emotion. But the latter can take place only when the emotion, of which they are recognized to be
the effects, is actually present in heart. They are infallible signs of emotion. They are eight in number. They are
included in the list of forty-nine bhavas, admitted by bharatha.

Forty-nine bhavas, however, including eight sattvika bhavas, which are nothing more than anubhavas, but are
classed separately, because they are involuntary and therefore, are unimistakable reflexions of inner emotive
state;

Thirty three transient emotions and eight persisting emotions) are dealt with exhaustively, because of their special
utility in giving rise to aesthetic experience. Let us, therefore, state clearly the meaning and function of bhava.

This disposes (note 10) of Śrīśaṅkuka’s earlier attempt to account for rasa in terms of logical inference reducing it
to our way of interpreting the (even unspoken) feelings of others in real life. For the same reason, the rasa is not
‘located’ in the actor as would be the case of fire deduced to be burning on a hill emitting smoke. Perception,
memory, inference, feeling, etc., are rather integrated here into a unique (sui generis) mode of (aesthetic)
cognition (pratīti, bodha).

20 This disposes of Bhaṭṭa Lollaṭa’s earlier claim that the basic emotion, somehow intensified by the mixture of
the determinants, concomitants, and consequents, is transformed into rasa. What remains unaccounted for from
the perspective of Sāṅkhya and other psychological frameworks derived from an ‘ascending’ spiritual perspective
is the precise working of the (tantric) ‘alchemy’ responsible for such transmutation.

Rasa is ultimately reflexive consciousness mediated by emotion

Rasa is hence not the psychological ‘effect’ that the artistry ‘produces’ in us but rather the (source and)
inner organizing principle of the aesthetic creation, its very meaning.18 We do not particularly relish the
emotions of others inferred in real life, so the aesthetic emotion cannot be reduced to the rasa merely
deduced in the āśraya (it’s irrelevant whether the actor is really feeling that or any emotion).19 The
dramatic spectacle does not simply ‘intensify’ our worldly emotions, for we would otherwise never lose
an opportunity to fall into a fit of psychopathic anger or wallow in suicidal depression.20 Nor is stagecraft
an illusion for we do not mistake the objective not even an emotional object presented to consciousness
but rather a specific non-mundane (alaukika) mode of cognition (bodha, pratīti) that is indistinguishable
from an active relishing (āsvādana, rasanā).25 Since emotions—not even love, the basis for that most
delectable rasa, the erotic sentiment (śṛṅgāra)—are not in themselves objects of relish, what is really
being enjoyed here is the reflexivity (vimarśa) of consciousness as mediated and sustained by a
particular emotional state.26 This is why Abhinavagupta repeatedly equates rasa with a more
fundamental and universal ‘aesthetic rapture’ (camatkāra) that reveals itself in a variety of
circumstances that are not artistic in the conventional sense, particularly in modes of ‘spiritualizing’
otherwise ‘worldly’ experience.27 Though evoked or, rather, mirrored by the emotions in the typical
aesthetic context, rasa is ultimately an inalienable property of consciousness itself.

1. Introduction
In Rasaethetics, Schechner(2001) has
stated, that “rasa is a cumulative result of
vibhava (stimulus), anubhava(involuntary
action) and vyabhichari bhava( voluntary
reaction) . For example, just when various
condiments and sauces and herbs and other
materials are mixed, a taste is experienced.
So is it with the different bhavas (emotions),
the sthayi bhava (permanent emotions
expressed inside ) becomes a rasa”. (p. 29)
Rasa, according to the Indian
aesthetics, is an essence of performative art.
It is not only felt by the actors/ performers
but is also conveyed by them to the sensitive
spectators, who after enjoying the various
emotions expressed by the actors through
their words, expressions and gestures feel
the pleasure.
India cinema, since its conception,
has relied on natyasastra for its skeletal
structure in terms of both its theme and
structure. Its domestic themes that circle
around love and overpowering grief , the
stereotypical roles of the chivalric hero and
pristine heroines, the larger than life
backgrounds, exquisite make up and
costumes and innumerable musical and
dance sequences bear testimony to the
aesthetic principles of this ancient text.
Unlike Euro-American cinema, based on
Konstantin Stanislavsky's acting methods,
that emphasizes on 'becoming' the character,
Indian cinema is completely based on
conveying the emotion to spectator and
experiencing the 'spectacle'.
2. Background to ‘The Natyasastra’
Bharata Muni(200B.C), the Indian
performance theorist and philosopher, is
credited with the formulation of the ultimate
text of performing arts as well the rasa
theory and is celebrated as the father of
Indian performative arts. Bharata’s
Natyasastra strongly argues that the ultimate
sensation depends upon the emotion felt by
the audience (as guided by the actors
performance). According to the Natyasastra,
durable psychological states are eight that
aid one in experiencing that singular
spiritual freedom. Though the actor on stage
and the character played by the actor dictate
the emotion but it is the cultivated spectator,
who has to witness the action and
experience the emotion produced on stage.
Bharata believes that the relevant
representation of the durable psychological
states acts a stimulus in evoking in the
spectator a verisimilitude of other
psychological states that is then known as a
Sentiment. The Sentiment, or Rasa, being a
vicarious experience, does not affect him in
any other way, bringing in its wake a
spiritual freedom and pure joy, which
purifies the soul. It is on a very similar
consideration that Aristotle spoke of
catharsis in connection to witnessing a
drama of tragic contents which are not very
dissimilar to the pathetic, the odious and the
terrible sentiments.
The Psychological states, Durable as
well as Complimentary, relate primarily to
the characters in the play, the hero or the
heroine, as Bharata Muni asserts. Speaking
of how one experiences the exalted state of
Rasa, Bharata takes up the example of the
Pathetic Sentiment. He believes it grows
from an affliction like separation from dear
ones, unrequited love, loss of fame, wealth.
someones death, captivity or a similar
misfortune, i.e the Determinants(vibhavas).
But for a complete appreciation, the
spectator must witness those reproduced on
the stage, the effects of all the vibhavas or
Determinants upon the actors should be
made manifest through acting and as a
natural consequence of the vibhavas or the
Determinants, the characters concerned
International Journal of English Language & Translation Studies ISSN: 2308-5460
Volume: 03 Issue: 01 January-March, 2015
Cite this article as: Ibkar, A. (2015). The Natyasastra and Indian Cinema: A study of the Rasa Theory as a
Cornerstone for Indian Aesthetics. International Journal of English Language & Translation Studies, 3(1), 80-87.
Retrieved from http://www.eltsjournal.org
Page | 82
would shed tears, lament, change their gait,
posture, show drooping of their limbs,
leading to the anubhavas or the
Consequents. But another vehicle of the
Sentiments are the Complementary
Psychological States (vyabhichari bhavas)
and are so called because they come along
with the Durable Psychological States and
strengthen the latter. In case of the Pathetic
Sentiment, which arises from not having the
desired union with the beloved or from
being separated, there occur the following
Complementary Psychological States:
indifference, languor, delusion, dejection,
sadness, illness etc? Even though they are
transitory and disappear, they are catalyst to
experiencing the rasa. As an addition to the
eight Rasa, Abhinav Gupta added a ninth
rasa, the shanta rasa, or bliss. The ninth
rasa, philosophers argue is not a new rasa
as one achieves this emotion when the other
eight rasa join together giving the audience
a sense of supreme fulfilment. In
rasaesthetics Schechner(2001) has written
that, “ a perfect performance, should one
occur, would not transmit or express shanta
rasa but allow shanta rasa to be experienced
simultaneously and absolutely by the
performers and partakers”. (p. 32)
3. Indian Cinema and the Rasa Theory
Indian cinema is completely based
on experiencing each rasa. Every aspect of
the performance in cinema must be in
synchronisation and performance must
display to perfection every rasa. In Indian
cinema, the actors, or the Rasic performers
portray their emotions even more than the
actual characters they are playing thus
conveying well the emotion to the audience,
which is the main aim of performative art
according to the Natyasastra. The role of the
eight rasas is quite central to Indian cinema
and its structure. It not only works to drive
the plot and accentuate the behaviour of the
characters; its function is deeply engraved in
the basic storyline. The rasas have a
dominant role to play in creating the
characters in a film. Shringara signifies
beauty, love and faithfulness or devotion
and is always a strong trait of the lead
female character, the pure and innocent
heroine. Veer rasa, which highlights vigour,
strength, courage as well as pride defines the
proud, chivalric hero. Bollywood film is
highly dependent on all the nine rasas.
They are significant in a number of ways.
The rasa help create the sterotypical roles
and exaggerated facial expressions and
mannerisms. Quite regularly will the
handsome and courageous hero adopt arms
when crossed, show resolute indifference
when confronted with lesser characters, such
as the conniving mother-in-law complete
with complaints, shrill tone and wailing. The
fluttering eyelashes of the innocent maiden
are just as contrived and just as important a
part of the shringara rasa.
Taking up the example of
Bollywood, one can argue that performance
in Indian cinema is very Natyasastra
oriented, unlike the modern Euro American
cinema based on the methods of Konstantin
Stanislavsky. This difference lies in every
aspect of Indian cinema, in the performance
of the actors, the technique of acting, the
music, sangeet, background score and even
emotions produced by the audience, the
difference, in a word is, Rasa. Russian
Stanislavsky created this methodology
which later got developed into the basic
code for modern theatre. This methodology
differs from Indian cinema in its belief that
the actor should completely inhabit the spirit
of the character to be played. Stanislavsky
argues in favour of this idea of ‘becoming’
the character. An actor could perform only
when he becomes the character completely.
He argued against the process of enactment
International Journal of English Language & Translation Studies ISSN: 2308-5460
Volume: 03 Issue: 01 January-March, 2015
Cite this article as: Ibkar, A. (2015). The Natyasastra and Indian Cinema: A study of the Rasa Theory as a
Cornerstone for Indian Aesthetics. International Journal of English Language & Translation Studies, 3(1), 80-87.
Retrieved from http://www.eltsjournal.org
Page | 83
as theorised by Bharata in Natyasastra.
Natyasastra believes that the conveyance of
the emotion is important and hence gives
value to the Spectacle. According to
natyasastra , the enactment process has four
steps. First is the experience of the poet,
then the creation of the text, i.e.,
reconstruction of the experience of the poet.
The actor then tries to enact the effect of the
experience on the poet, in the last stage the
audience recreates the experience that the
actor portrays. But Stanislavsky believes
that the actor must not transpose his
understanding and interpretation of the
character to his performance for there is
always a possibility that the depiction of
emotion might change from its original form
and conception. Stanislavsky believes that
an actor should aim at becoming a living
breathing embodiment of the character than
just trying to convey an emotion, for a
character is more important than the actor in
the bigger picture of the story. Performances
inspired and influenced by Stanislavsky, as
Matthews(2009) has stated, “rely on the
development of a character through the
actor’s embodiment of the character and
allowing the emotion created by the story to
flow inside out” . (P. 38)
This is precisely what differentiates
between the Euro American cinema and the
Indian cinema. Indian cinema relies mainly
on the Rasa and the idea of the Spectacle.
The performance of the actors is but a
medium to channelize the emotion from the
movie to the audience. A comparison
between some aspects of the movies
Slumdog millionaire, Rang De Basanti and
Coolie reveals well the difference between
the two theories and also the dependence of
Indian cinema on the Rasa theory. In
Slumdog Millionaire, the British actor
portraying the character of Jamal Malik
strictly adheres to the method of
Stanislavsky and becomes one with the
character that the movie demands rather than
becoming an embodiment of the rasa. When
compared to movies like Coolie, this
performance stands out as being completely
Anti-Rasic. The actor is a dull eyed, lost,
slack jawed, pale, out of place twenty five
year old throughout the movie, maintaining
the unchanging personality even when he is
tortured by the police or is losing his
beloved ill-fatedly, never utilising the scope
of expressing the emotion that would quite
obviously burst out of the actor to reach the
audience in traditional desi Indian cinema.
Acting or Abhinaya,according to the
Natyasastra, involves not only action but a
myriad of other activites. Explaining
Abhinaya, Bharata(trans. 1995), speaks of
four kinds of acting: Angika abhinaya,
vachik abhinaya, aharya abhinay and
sattyika abhinaya. The communication
through body movements, which involves
the movements of major limbs like head,
chest, hands and feet as well as expression
through facial features like eyes, nose, lips,
cheeks, chin etc. and conveys meaning
through glances, gestures, gaits is angika
abhinaya. The communication by speech is
called vachik abhinaya. This aids the
audience to experience rasa through the
power of language. In this, the vowels,
consonants and their places of origin in the
mouth, pitch, tone, intonation, modes of
address vary in order to create the
spectacle. Natyasastra gives a lot of
importance to aaharya abhinay. It involves
discussing the importance of heavy make
up, dresses that complement the role and
decorating the actor's hair and body with
ornaments, jewellery and garlands. Aaharya
abhinay is this very extraneous
representation done by means of costumes,
make up, ornaments, stage decorations and
props. Representation of internal mood and