ABSTRACT

I. Indian aesthetics presents the characteristic concept of r a s a for which it is difficult to find an English equivalent. Literally , r a sa' means two things among others-s-it means essence and it means what is tasted or felt. The aesthetic conception of r a s a combines the two senses and signifies the essence of a feeling. which is indifferently taken either as an eternal feeling or as the object of it, an eternal value that is felt . 'Essence'. however. is an intellectual concept and the phrase 'essence of feeling' requires explanation . ' Essence' here is not taken in the sense of a logical universal. There is no suggestion in the Indian theory of art, as in certain other theories. that the same universal that is known as the essence of things is apprehended in feeling in a confused way as r a sa. The logical universal has sometimes been identified with the ideal for life and the aesthetic essence has been conceived as the ideal that is felt or the feeling of the ideal. R a s a in the Indian conception is not identified with the Idea or universal truth. or with the ideal to be realised or as realised. It is understood purely th~ough feeling and in terms of feeling; and if it is to be called essence or ideal, it can only be by way of metaphor . There is danger, however , of making too much of the metaphors both in the general theory of art and in the actual criticism of particular works of art. (Aesthetics-to start with at any rate -should not assume any speculative or religious postulates) . What appears valuable to artistic feeling need not so appear-s-at least to the same degree-to the intellect or to the will • and feeling here should have the final say.