220
काव्यार्थभावनास्वादो नर्तकस्य न वार्यते ॥ ४२ ॥

नर्तकोऽपि न लौकिकरसेन1051 रसवान् भवेत् । तदानीं भोग्यत्वेन स्वमहिलादेरग्रहणात् । काव्यार्थभावनायां त्वस्मदादिवत् काव्यरसास्वादोऽस्यापि न वार्यते ।

ननु रामाद्यनुकार्यमनुकुर्वन् नर्तकोऽपि रसवान् भवति । तद् रामादिगतलौकिकरसेन रसवत्त्वे हि युज्यते । तत्राह काव्यार्थेति । सोऽपि न लौकिकरसेन रसवान् । किं तर्हि ? अस्मदादिवत् काव्यरसेनेत्यर्थः ।

  1. Kumārasvāmin in his Ratnā:aṇa says thus: ayaṃ ca raso laukikālaukikabhedena dvividhaḥ. tatrādyaḥ kadalīrasālādiphalāsvādajanyānandasadṛśaḥ kāryaś ca. itaro brahmānandasabrahmacārī nityaś ca. (Balamanorama Press ed., 1950, p. 204).

    Vidyānātha also says at the end of the chapter thus: nirvedādyupabhogabhāvitanijāsvādātireko raso loke syād anukārya eva kathito nāṭye tu sāmājike (ibid., p. 211). loke syād is explained as laukikaś cet, and it means raso laukikaś cet anukārye eva kathitaḥ. It is not clear as to whether in the opinion of Dhanika the word rasa could be used with reference to the one known as anukāryagata (i.e. laukika) as Bh.Nr. explains the expression laukikarasa differently (ṣaṭsaṃkhyākatvāt laukikarasānām). The (alaukika-) rasa of the kāvya, i.e. the one known as sāmājikagata is of course noted by all as rasa. Abhinavagupta’s remarks evaṃ hi laukiko ’pi kiṃ na rasaḥ?, and (again later on) tenālaukikacamatkārātmā rasāsvādaḥ … laukikasaṃvedanavilakṣaṇa eva (both on page 284, vol. I, G.O.S., 1956) seem to indicate that in his opinion the word rasa could not be used with reference to the laukika one. Dhanika’s remarks nartako’pi na laukikarasena rasavān bhavet. tadānīṃ bhogyatvena svamahilāder agrahaṇād. Kāvyārthabhāvanāyāṃ tu asmadādivat kāvyarasāsvādaḥ asyāpi na vāryate, however, seem to indicate that the word rasa could be used with reference to what is known as anukāryagata and the one known as sāmājikagata.