Hello everyone, in this lecture we are going to take a look at Fattah Lollada. Lollada is a Kashmiri scholar and a Mimamsaka philosopher. The general conception about the time of Bhattalallada is that he lived later than Udbhada since Abhinava Gupta's Abhinava Bharati clearly states that Lallada opposed the views of Udbhada. Andresa theory.
So, we can undoubtedly place him later than 800 CE. Since, Lollada is the direct object of critique by Sri Sankuga, whom we can reasonably place around 850 CE, putting Bhattalollada early in the first half of the 9th century would make sense of all our data. One of the major impediments that a scholar who is interested in understanding the intellectual history of Rasa is the sheer absence of many texts that are irrecoverably lost.
One such text that is lost forever is Fattal Allada's commentary on Faridha's Nati Shastra. Today we know about the theory of Fattal Allada primarily through three sources namely Abhinavagupta's commentary on Ananda Varthana's commentary on the Thuanyaloka and Bharata's Nattisastra and Mamata's Kaviprakasha. Before Uttapada, Tamaha had also written a commentary on Bharata's Nattisastra, but that too is unfortunately lost.
Pata Lalada marks an important position in the intellectual history of Rasa as one of the oldest commentators on Bharatasnati Shastra. Pollock in his Rasa reader highlights the importance of Pata Lalada in the intellectual history of Rasa through the following words. Pollock says with Pata Lalada we can perceive the true commencement of the extraordinarily extraordinary, extraordinarily intense. investigation into literary emotion that would make the next three centuries in India the most fertile in the history of aesthetics anywhere before European modernity. This commencement was no doubt the result of a rediscovery of or at least re-engagement with Faradha's treatise on drama in Kashmir in the early 9th century, a work that raised in a productive way as many questions about Rasa.
as it answered. Bhattalallada in general conforms to the view of Bharata about rasa propounded in Nati Shastra. According to Lallada, rasa is produced by the conjunction of the bhava, anubhava and vyapijari bhavas in conjunction with the sthai bhavas. For him, the cause of rasa is vipavas.
They stimulate the stable emotions or stai-pavas dormant in the character. Once the stai-pava in the character is aroused by the vipavas, they will be jade. or transitory mental states further accentuate and nourish stai bhavas.
The impact of experiencing these transitory emotions will certainly be manifest through certain physical reactions on the part of the characters called anubhavas. The anubhavas function as the means of knowledge about the stai bhavas in the character. Lalada obtains that Anubhavas are the characters response to the stable emotions which are caused by the Vibhavas and nourished by the Viphijari Bhavas. Lalada holds that if not properly strengthened by aesthetic elements, stable emotions cannot be transformed into aesthetic emotions.
Lalada also reminds us that a Vyapichari bhava or transitory emotion, although it is a mental state, cannot develop into rasas. Only stable emotions are capable of being strengthened and qualified to become a rasa. It is just as in Bharata's analogy of the mixed drink. Among the various condiments, spices and substances, a certain one acts as the predominant perfuming element and hence is like the stable emotion, whereas other ingredients appear intermittently. and hence are like transitory emotions.
For Lallada, the locus or the sight of Rasa is the character. Although, we can figuratively say that it also lies in the actor by the power of his or her identification with the characters they enact. The spectator figures nowhere in Lallada's theory of Rasa. According to Lalada, the stai bhava and vipava are connected by an object and means of production relationship or utpadhya utpadhaka bhava bandha. In other words, the vipava is the object and means of production relationship.
function as the means of production for the object called stai bhava. The relation between stai bhava and anubhava are connected by a relation of object and means of knowledge or gamya gamaga bhava bantha. That is to say the anubhava's function as the means of knowledge to understand the object called stai bhavas which exist in the character.
Finally, the relationship between the stai bhava and vyapijari bhava is a relation of object and means of enhancement or posya poshaka bhava bandha. That is to say, the vyapijari bhavas enhance and strengthen the object called stai bhavas to become rasas. Lalada believed that rasa inheres originally in the character as readily available product.
So, his theory is known as Utpatti Vada and is more or less consonant with that of Bharata's. Its focus was on the intensified state of this Taipava in the character or the actor, but it could not explain how this was transferred to the spectator who experienced Rasa. Bhattalallada's theory failed to explain this.
Lallada also makes some observations about the number of rasas. According to Lallada, although rasas were potentially infinite in number, only those listed by Bharata in Natyashastra are capable of portrayal on the stage. Before we wind up this class, let us discuss all the major points that we discussed in this class once again. We saw that Lollada considers Rasa as the Stai Bhava intensified. He believes that the relationship between Stai Bhava and Vibhava is subject and means of production.
In other words, Lalara believes that Vipava is the vital means by which Stai-bhava is produced. Then, he proceeds to say that the relationship between Stai-bhava and Anubhava is the relation of object and means of knowledge. That is to say, it is the presence of Anubhava that informs us about the existence of a particular Stai-bhava in a character.
Finally, the relation between Stai-bhava and Vyabhijari bhava is that of object and means of enhancement. To put it differently, Stai bhava is nourished and intensified by Vyabhijari bhavas. These are the major points that we need to keep in our mind with respect to Fattah Lollada's theory. I hope you understood all these major points.
In the next video, we will see the criticism of Fattah Lollada's views by Shankuka. Thank you.