Text 8.9

दीप्त्यात्म-विस्तृतेर् हेतुर् ओजो वीर-रस-स्थिति ॥ ८.६९cd ॥
बीभत्स-रौद्र-रसयोस् तस्याधिक्यं क्रमेण च ॥ ८.७०ab ॥

dīptyātma-vistṛter hetur ojo vīra-rasa-sthiti || 8.69cd ||
bībhatsa-raudra-rasayos tasyādhikyaṃ krameṇa ca ||8.70ab||

dīptyā—by blazingness; ātma—of the mind; vistṛteḥ—of the expansion; hetuḥ—the cause; ojaḥ—the guṇas named ojas (vigor); vīra-rasa—is in vīra-rasa; sthiti—whose existence; bībhatsa-raudra-rasayoḥ—in bībhatsa-rasa and in raudra-rasa; tasya—of it (ojas); ādhikyam—increase; krameṇa—sequentially; ca—and.

By means of blazingness, ojas (vigor) is the cause of the expansion of the mind. It is present in vīra-rasa. Its preponderance is sequentially more important in bībhatsa-rasa and in raudra-rasa.

citta-vistāra-rūpa-dīpti-janakam ojo vīrādiṣu tasya krameṇaivādhikyam.

Ojas guṇa generates blazingness in the form of the expansion of the mind. Ojas is sequentially more preponderant in vīra-rasa, bībhatsa-rasa, and raudra-rasa.

Commentary:

Here also Viśvanātha Kavirāja disagrees with Mammaṭa, since the main definition of a guṇa refers to a quality of the rasa, by saying that ojas is blazingness in the form of the expansion of the mind.^[1]

This blazingness is not necessarily the opposite of the melting of the heart. Govinda Ṭhakkura specifies that nothing is said about hāsya-rasa, adbhuta-rasa, or bhayānaka-rasa because in each one of those, both mādhurya and ojas are present.^[2] According to Abhinavagupta, mādhurya is eminent in hāsya since hāsya is an aspect of śṛṅgāra (Bharata Muni said hāsya originates from śṛṅgāra),^[3] and ojas is equally prominent because an attribute of hāsya is the expansion of the mind, whereas in bhayānaka and in bībhatsa, ojas is prominent and mādhurya (melting) is slight.^[4] Govinda Ṭhakkura says there is only a trace of mādhurya in bībhatsa-rasa—and that makes the difference with vīra-rasa and raudra-rasa.^[5] In those two rasas,“blazingness” means being fired up. Ānandavardhana only said that blazingness refers to “raudra-rasa and so on.”^[6] Mammaṭa interprets this to mean vīra, bībhatsa, and raudra, whereas Abhinavagupta says it means vīra, adbhuta, and raudra,^[7] in conformity with Ānandavardhana’s statement: raudrādbhutādi-viṣayam ojaḥ (Dhvanyāloka 3.6).

Paṇḍita-rāja Jagannātha states two opinions: The first one is that both mādhurya and ojas occur in hāsya, adbhuta, and bhayānaka, and the second one is that only prasāda occurs in those three,^[8] so that the nine rasas are classed three by three. In that line of thought, Nāgeśa Bhaṭṭa says there is no rule that hāsya, adbhuta, or bhayānaka must have either mādhurya or ojas or both mādhurya and ojas.^[9]

Footnotes and references:

[1]:

ojaś cittasya vistāra-rūpaṃ dīptatvam ucyate || (Sāhitya-darpaṇa 8.4)

[2]:

prādhānyena mādhuryaujasor ekaika-vidhānam atra prakrāntam ato hāsyādbhutabhayānakeṣu na kiñcid vihitam, teṣūbhaya-guṇa-prādhānyāt (Kāvya-pradīpa 8.69).

[3]:

śṛṅgārād dhi bhaved dhāsyaḥ (Nāṭya-śāstra 6.39).

[4]:

hāsyasya śṛṅgārāṅgatayā mādhuryaṃ prakṛṣṭaṃ vikāsa-dharmatayā caujo’pi prakṛṣṭam iti sāmyaṃ dvayoḥ. bhayānakasya bhagna-citta-vṛtti-svabhāvatve’pi vibhāvasya dīptatayā ojaḥ prakṛṣṭaṃ mādhuryam alpam. bībhatse’py evam (Locana 2.9).

[5]:

tad etad vīra-raudrayor niṣpratipakṣaṃ bībhatse tu mādhurya-lavānuviddham iti viśeṣaḥ (Kāvya-pradīpa 8.69).

[6]:

raudrādayo hi rasāḥ parāṃ dīptim ujjvalatāṃ janayantīti lakṣaṇayā ta eva dīptir ity ucyate (Dhvanyāloka 2.9).

[7]:

raudrety-ādi, ādi-śabdaḥ prakāre, tena vīrādbhutayor api grahaṇam (Locana 2.9).

[8]:

adbhuta-hāsya-bhayānakānāṃ guṇa-dvaya-yogitvaṃ kecid icchanti. apare tu prasādamātram (Rasa-gaṅgādhara, KM p. 54).

[9]:

evaṃ śṛṅgarādīnāṃ niyata-vibhāvāditvena guṇa-niyamaḥ. hāsyādbhuta-bhayānakeṣu tu vibhāvādy-aniyamān mādhuryaujasoḥ sattvān na tan-niyama iti bhāvaḥ (Uddyota 8.69).